> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Brown [mailto:broo...@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com]
> Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2011 7:09 PM
> To: Ashish Jangam
> Cc: sa...@openedhand.com; linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org; Dajun; linaro-
> d...@lists.linaro.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/11] MFD: DA9052 MFD core module
> 
> On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 07:23:44PM +0530, ashishj3 wrote:
> 
> > +choice
> > +   prompt "Chip Type"
> > +   depends on MFD_DA9053_SPI || MFD_DA9053_I2C
> > +config PMIC_DA9053AA
> > +   bool "Support Dialog Semiconductor DA9053 AA PMIC"
> > +   help
> > +     Support for Dialog semiconductor DA9053 AA PMIC.
> > +     This driver provides common support for accessing  the device,
> > +     additional drivers must be enabled in order to use the
> > +     functionality of the device.
> > +config PMIC_DA9053Bx
> 
> Could do with blank lines between blocks.  Though looking at the code
> here I don't understand why these are compile options at all, or if they
> need to be compile options for some reason why they're not independantly
> selectable?
DA9052 PMIC chip id may get OTP therefore chip id cannot be used as 
a distinguishing factor. Hence these compile time options were introduced.
DA9053 is a higher version of DA9052 therefore not independently selectable.
This means that there can be either DA9052 or DA9053 on system. I need to 
correct
this Kconfig to take care of this. 
> 
> > +int da9052_reg_read(struct da9052 *da9052, unsigned char reg)
> > +{
> > +   int val, ret;
> > +
> > +   if (reg > DA9052_MAX_REG_CNT) {
> > +           dev_err(da9052->dev, "invalid reg %x\n", reg);
> > +           return -EINVAL;
> > +   }
> > +
> > +   #ifdef CONFIG_MFD_DA9052_SPI
> > +           reg = (reg << 1) | 1;
> > +   #endif
> 
> There's several problems here:
> 
> - You shouldn't be indenting preprocessor directives.
> - You shouldn't be adding extra indentation before.
> - This will break I2C devices if SPI support is built into the driver.
> 
> Please, when writing code try to understand the abstractions you're
> using.  For example here think about the purpose of being able to build
> I2C and SPI separately and simultaneously and the goal of the regmap
> API.
> 
> Looks like we need to add per device mangling for the SPI register
> read/write flag.
For now we will handle this as below:-
During SPI and I2C registration we will add bus type(SPI/I2C) info in the
struct da9052. And before initiating any device I/O this struct member will
be read and reg address will be manipulated if needed.
> 
> > +   da9052_group_write(da9052, DA9052_EVENT_A_REG, 4, v);
> > +
> > +   #ifndef CONFIG_PMIC_DA9053Bx
> > +   DA9052_FIXME();
> > +   #endif
> 
> This should be runtime detected based on the device name, either from
> the device registration or by reading back chip identification.
As said above getting chip info will not work in DA9053/53 case. Also DA9052 
code 
works for DA9053 except for few minor changes in MFD and regulator module.
In this case registering different device will also require a preprocessor 
directive
Or separate DA9053 file therefore this option was not opt. 
>



_______________________________________________
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Reply via email to