Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 13 Jul 2021 16:24:54 +0100 | From | Mark Brown <> | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] Add software node support to regulator framework |
| |
On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 12:32:26AM +0100, Daniel Scally wrote:
> I do think it can simplify driver code too; a lot of them aren't written > to parse platform data to get the init data, as they're just relying on > reading it from devicetree so in the event that we get more cases like > this, we need to modify those drivers to look for platform data too. On > the other hand, even the drivers that don't directly call > of_get_regulator_init_data() still do that lookup during the > regulator_of_get_init_data() call in regulator_register(), so the ones > that do parse platform data for init_data structs will check DT as part > of regulator_register() anyway. Imitating that seems simpler to me.
The driver code is trivial boilerplate, assuming someone doesn't go and implement a helper to register stuff separately like I suggested. The proposed swnode stuff would involve duplicating the DT parsing code. This seems like a whole lot of effort for something that provides a worse result than either of the existing things.
> It also creates some problems to suppress the enumeration of the i2c > device via ACPI (which we'll have to do in a machine specific fashion, > because some laptops have this chip with properly configured ACPI and
To be clear I think that's a terrible idea.
> > down to being another data table, I imagine you could write a helper for > > it, or probably even come up with some generic thing that let you > > register a platform data/DMI combo independently of the driver to get it > > out of the driver code (looking more like the existing GPIO code which > > is already being used in another bit of this quirking).
> The advantage of the GPIO lookups is there's no need to have the pointer > to the registered devices to register the lookup table; we could imitate > that, by adding entries to a list with the lookup values being device > and regulator name (with the init data as the thing that's "looked up") > and check for those during regulator_register() maybe?
Like I keep saying I think that's a much better approach than trying to use swnodes, they just seem like a terrible fit for the problem. [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |