lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Oct]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 7/9] soc: mediatek: pwrap: add MediaTek MT6380 as one slave of pwrap
From
Date


On 08/15/2017 11:09 AM, sean.wang@mediatek.com wrote:
> From: Sean Wang <sean.wang@mediatek.com>
>
> Add MediaTek MT6380 regulator becoming one of PMIC wrapper slave
> and also add extra new regmap_config of 32-bit mode for MT6380
> since old regmap_config of 16-bit mode can't be fit into the need.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chenglin Xu <chenglin.xu@mediatek.com>
> Signed-off-by: Chen Zhong <chen.zhong@mediatek.com>
> Signed-off-by: Sean Wang <sean.wang@mediatek.com>
> ---
> drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c
> index 1f8b69a..047e3d9 100644
> --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c
> +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c
> @@ -501,6 +501,7 @@ struct pmic_wrapper;
> struct pwrap_slv_type {
> const u32 *dew_regs;
> enum pmic_type type;
> + const struct regmap_config *regmap;
> /* pwrap operations are highly associated with the PMIC types,
> * so the pointers added increases flexibility allowing determination
> * which type is used by the detection through device tree.
> @@ -1109,7 +1110,7 @@ static irqreturn_t pwrap_interrupt(int irqno, void *dev_id)
> return IRQ_HANDLED;
> }
>
> -static const struct regmap_config pwrap_regmap_config = {
> +static const struct regmap_config pwrap_regmap_config16 = {
> .reg_bits = 16,
> .val_bits = 16,
> .reg_stride = 2,
> @@ -1118,9 +1119,19 @@ static const struct regmap_config pwrap_regmap_config = {
> .max_register = 0xffff,
> };
>
> +static const struct regmap_config pwrap_regmap_config32 = {
> + .reg_bits = 32,
> + .val_bits = 32,
> + .reg_stride = 4,
> + .reg_read = pwrap_regmap_read,
> + .reg_write = pwrap_regmap_write,
> + .max_register = 0xffff,
> +};
> +
> static const struct pwrap_slv_type pmic_mt6323 = {
> .dew_regs = mt6323_regs,
> .type = PMIC_MT6323,
> + .regmap = &pwrap_regmap_config16,
> .pwrap_read = pwrap_read16,
> .pwrap_write = pwrap_write16,
> };
> @@ -1128,6 +1139,7 @@ static const struct pwrap_slv_type pmic_mt6323 = {
> static const struct pwrap_slv_type pmic_mt6380 = {
> .dew_regs = NULL,
> .type = PMIC_MT6380,
> + .regmap = &pwrap_regmap_config32,
> .pwrap_read = pwrap_read32,
> .pwrap_write = pwrap_write32,
> };
> @@ -1135,6 +1147,7 @@ static const struct pwrap_slv_type pmic_mt6380 = {
> static const struct pwrap_slv_type pmic_mt6397 = {
> .dew_regs = mt6397_regs,
> .type = PMIC_MT6397,
> + .regmap = &pwrap_regmap_config16,
> .pwrap_read = pwrap_read16,
> .pwrap_write = pwrap_write16,
> };
> @@ -1144,9 +1157,15 @@ static const struct of_device_id of_slave_match_tbl[] = {
> .compatible = "mediatek,mt6323",
> .data = &pmic_mt6323,
> }, {
> + /* The MT6380 slave device is directly pointed to the regulator
> + * device which is different from the cases MT6323 and MT6397
> + * where they're one kind of MFDs.
> + */
> + .compatible = "mediatek,mt6380-regulator",
> + .data = &pmic_mt6380,

I understand that mt6380 only provides a regulator and no other function other
PMICs provide, right?

Then maybe write a comment like:
The MT6380 PMIC only implements a regulator, so we bind it directly instead of
using a MFD. If so, we should state that in the pwrap bindings document, I think.

Regards,
Matthias

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-10-10 12:02    [W:2.426 / U:0.108 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site