Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] misc: Add power-efuse driver

[Zev Weiss]

On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 12:23:44AM PST, Zev Weiss wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 07, 2022 at 11:07:57PM PST, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>
> > > +EFUSE_ERROR_ATTR(under_voltage, REGULATOR_ERROR_UNDER_VOLTAGE);
> > > +EFUSE_ERROR_ATTR(over_current, REGULATOR_ERROR_OVER_CURRENT);
> > > +EFUSE_ERROR_ATTR(regulation_out, REGULATOR_ERROR_REGULATION_OUT);
> > > +EFUSE_ERROR_ATTR(fail, REGULATOR_ERROR_FAIL);
> > > +EFUSE_ERROR_ATTR(over_temp, REGULATOR_ERROR_OVER_TEMP);
> > > +EFUSE_ERROR_ATTR(under_voltage_warn, REGULATOR_ERROR_UNDER_VOLTAGE_WARN);
> > > +EFUSE_ERROR_ATTR(over_current_warn, REGULATOR_ERROR_OVER_CURRENT_WARN);
> > > +EFUSE_ERROR_ATTR(over_voltage_warn, REGULATOR_ERROR_OVER_VOLTAGE_WARN);
> > > +EFUSE_ERROR_ATTR(over_temp_warn, REGULATOR_ERROR_OVER_TEMP_WARN);
> > > +
> > > +static struct attribute *efuse_attrs[] = {
> > > +	&dev_attr_operstate.attr,
> > > +	&dev_attr_under_voltage.attr,
> > > +	&dev_attr_over_current.attr,
> > > +	&dev_attr_regulation_out.attr,
> > > +	&dev_attr_fail.attr,
> > > +	&dev_attr_over_temp.attr,
> > > +	&dev_attr_under_voltage_warn.attr,
> > > +	&dev_attr_over_current_warn.attr,
> > > +	&dev_attr_over_voltage_warn.attr,
> > > +	&dev_attr_over_temp_warn.attr,
> > > +	NULL,
> > > +};
> > > +ATTRIBUTE_GROUPS(efuse);
> >
> > Shouldn't these all just be what all regulator drivers report?  Or power
> > drivers?  I find it odd that this would be the first driver that would
> > need to export these types of attributes.  Surely there's already a
> > class for this?
>
> The attributes available from the underlying regulator device don't 
> include the error flags, and while they do include its state 
> ('operstate' here), it's a read-only attribute, and from previous 
> discussions with Mark I gathered that was unlikely to change (whereas 
> it being read-write is a critical part of this driver's 
> functionality).
>
> Given his input on the first stab at this I took a while back, I've 
> been hoping to hear from Mark as to whether this looked more like 
> something he'd find palatable; perhaps he could chime in on this too?  
> (And/or on the regulator API question in the cover letter.)

Ping...Mark (or Liam?), any thoughts on an appropriate path forward on 
this?


Thanks,
Zev