Re: [PATCH 11/13] mfd: pm8008: rework driver

[Andy Shevchenko]

Mon, May 06, 2024 at 05:08:28PM +0200, Johan Hovold kirjoitti:
> Rework the pm8008 driver to match the new binding which no longer
> describes internal details like interrupts and register offsets
> (including which of the two consecutive I2C addresses the registers
> belong two).
> 
> Instead make the interrupt controller implementation internal and pass
> interrupts to the subdrivers using MFD cell resources.
> 
> Note that subdrivers may either get their resources, like register block
> offsets, from the parent MFD or this can be included in the subdrivers
> directly.
> 
> In the current implementation, the temperature alarm driver is generic
> enough to just get its base address and alarm interrupt from the parent
> driver, which already uses this information to implement the interrupt
> controller.
> 
> The regulator driver, however, needs additional information like parent
> supplies and regulator characteristics so in that case it is easier to
> just augment its table with the regulator register base addresses.
> 
> Similarly, the current GPIO driver already holds the number of pins and
> that lookup table can therefore also be extended with register offsets.
> 
> Note that subdrivers can now access the two regmaps by name, even if the
> primary regmap is registered last so that it's returned by default when
> no name is provided in lookups.
> 
> Finally, note that the current QPNP GPIO and temperature alarm
> subdrivers need some minor rework before they can be used with non-SPMI
> devices like the PM8008. The MFD cell names therefore use a "qpnp"
> rather than "spmi" prefix to prevent binding until the drivers have been
> updated.

..

> +static void devm_irq_domain_fwnode_release(void *res)
> +{

> +	struct fwnode_handle *fwnode = res;

Unneeded line, can be

static void devm_irq_domain_fwnode_release(void *fwnode)

> +	irq_domain_free_fwnode(fwnode);
> +}

..

> +	dummy = devm_i2c_new_dummy_device(dev, client->adapter, client->addr + 1);
> +	if (IS_ERR(dummy)) {
> +		rc = PTR_ERR(dummy);
> +		dev_err(&client->dev, "failed to claim second address: %d\n", rc);
> +		return rc;

		return dev_err_probe(...);

> +	}

..

> +	name = devm_kasprintf(dev, GFP_KERNEL, "%pOF-internal", dev->of_node);

You are using fwnode for IRQ domain and IRQ domain core uses fwnode, why OF here?

	name = devm_kasprintf(dev, GFP_KERNEL, "%pfw-internal", dev_fwnode(dev));

> +	if (!name)
> +		return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +	name = strreplace(name, '/', ':');

> +	fwnode = irq_domain_alloc_named_fwnode(name);
> +	if (!fwnode)
> +		return -ENOMEM;

..

> +	rc = devm_regmap_add_irq_chip_fwnode(dev, fwnode, regmap, client->irq,
>  				IRQF_SHARED, 0, &pm8008_irq_chip, &irq_data);
> -		if (rc)
> -			dev_err(dev, "failed to add IRQ chip: %d\n", rc);
> +	if (rc) {
> +		dev_err(dev, "failed to add IRQ chip: %d\n", rc);
> +		return rc;

		return dev_err_probe(...);

>  	}

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko