[PATCH 1/4] mfd: support 88pm80x in 80x driver

[Qiao Zhou]

>> +	ret = mfd_add_devices(chip->dev, 0, &onkey_devs[0],
>> +			      ARRAY_SIZE(onkey_devs), &onkey_resources[0],
>> +			      chip->irq_base);
>
>According to what I discussed with Mark in the previous version, I think you
>need to pass 0 instead of chip->irq_base here, and transform the interrupt
>numbers using the domain in the client drivers.
>
>> +
>> +const struct i2c_device_id pm80x_id_table[] = {
>> +	{"88PM800", CHIP_PM800},
>> +	{"88PM805", CHIP_PM805},
>> +};
>> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(i2c, pm80x_id_table);
>
>Since these are separate modules now, you have to move the device table
>into the split files as well.
Is it ok to export it in 88pm80x.h?
>> +
>> +/**
>> + * pm80x_reg_read: Read a single 88PM80x register.
>> + *
>> + * @map: regmap to read from.
>> + * @reg: Register to read.
>> + */
>> +int pm80x_reg_read(struct regmap *map, u32 reg)
>> +{
>> +	unsigned int val;
>> +	int ret;
>> +
>> +	ret = regmap_read(map, reg, &val);
>> +
>> +	if (ret < 0)
>> +		return ret;
>> +	else
>> +		return val;
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pm80x_reg_read);
>
>In your introductory email you write
>
>"Exported r/w API which requires regmap handle. as currently the pm800
>chip has 3 i2c device, only passing a pm80x_chip info can't ensure r/w the
>register in correct i2c device."
>
>Your first driver version had this, then you removed the functions
>after I asked you to, and now they are back, so I assume there is something
>I don't see yet. It looks like the function is just an unnecessary wrapper
>that is better open-coded in the caller. Can you explain again what the
>difference is?
After you suggest to change the r/w API so that caller doesn't care about it's
via i2c or spi, it makes sense. However due to pm800 has 3 i2c devices, and
it's hard to export such interface for pm800. Currently to add such interface
via regmap handle, caller still doesn't care about the actual hw implement,
also it's clear that all pm80x sub-driver or plat call the unified r/w API.
>> +/**
>> + * pm80x_bulk_read: Read multiple 88PM80x registers
>> + *
>> + * @map: regmap to read from
>> + * @reg: First register
>> + * @buf: Buffer to fill.  The data will be returned big endian.
>> + * @count: Number of registers
>> + */
>> +int pm80x_bulk_read(struct regmap *map, u32 reg, u8 *buf, int count)
>> +{
>> +	return regmap_raw_read(map, reg, buf, count);
>> +}
>
>Unused function? Either export this if you want to provide it as
>the general API, or drop the function.
It's used by rtc driver.
>> +int __devinit pm80x_device_init(struct pm80x_chip *chip,
>> +				struct pm80x_platform_data *pdata)
>
>> +void __devexit pm80x_device_exit(struct pm80x_chip *chip)
>
>> +SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS(pm80x_pm_ops, pm80x_suspend, pm80x_resume);
>
>I would think that these need to be exported as well, at least if
>you want the driver to be modular.
Would update. Thanks.
>> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/Kconfig b/drivers/mfd/Kconfig
>> index e129c82..96dd2d7 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mfd/Kconfig
>> +++ b/drivers/mfd/Kconfig
>> @@ -20,6 +20,18 @@ config MFD_88PM860X
>>  	  select individual components like voltage regulators, RTC and
>>  	  battery-charger under the corresponding menus.
>>  
>> +config MFD_88PM80X
>> +	bool "Support Marvell 88PM800/88PM805"
>> +	depends on I2C=y && GENERIC_HARDIRQS
>> +	select REGMAP_I2C
>> +	select REGMAP_IRQ
>> +	select MFD_CORE
>> +	help
>> +	  This supports for Marvell 88PM800/88PM805 Power Management IC.
>> +	  This includes the I2C driver and the core APIs _only_, you have to
>> +	  select individual components like voltage regulators, RTC and
>> +	  battery-charger under the corresponding menus.
>> +
>>  config MFD_SM501
>>  	tristate "Support for Silicon Motion SM501"
>>  	 ---help---
>> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/Makefile b/drivers/mfd/Makefile
>> index 75f6ed6..dc2584e 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mfd/Makefile
>> +++ b/drivers/mfd/Makefile
>> @@ -3,7 +3,9 @@
>>  #
>>  
>>  88pm860x-objs			:= 88pm860x-core.o 88pm860x-i2c.o
>> +88pm80x-objs			:= 88pm800-core.o 88pm805-core.o 88pm80x-i2c.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_MFD_88PM860X)	+= 88pm860x.o
>> +obj-$(CONFIG_MFD_88PM80X)	+= 88pm80x.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_MFD_SM501)		+= sm501.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_MFD_ASIC3)		+= asic3.o tmio_core.o
>
>I just noticed that it can currently only be builtin. Is there a strict
>>requirement for that? If not, better make it a tristate option.
>
>If you do that, aside from adding the exports mentioned above, you have
>to use three separate modules, as in
>
>obj-$(CONFIG_MFD_88PM80X)	+= 88pm800-core.o 88pm805-core.o 88pm80x-i2c.o
>
>or even
>
>obj-$(CONFIG_MFD_88PM800)	+= 88pm800-core.o 88pm800-core.o
>obj-$(CONFIG_MFD_88PM805)	+= 88pm800-core.o 88pm805-core.o
>
>with the respective Kconfig change.
Would update. Thanks.
>> diff --git a/include/linux/mfd/88pm80x.h b/include/linux/mfd/88pm80x.h
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..115348a
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/include/linux/mfd/88pm80x.h
>> @@ -0,0 +1,521 @@
>> +#ifndef __LINUX_MFD_88PM80X_H
>> +#define __LINUX_MFD_88PM80X_H
>> +
>> +#define PM80X_VERSION_MASK		(0xFF)	/* 80X chip ID mask */
>> +
>> +enum {
>> +	/* Procida */
>> +	PM800_CHIP_A0  = 0x60,
>> +	PM800_CHIP_A1  = 0x61,
>> +	PM800_CHIP_B0  = 0x62,
>> +	PM800_CHIP_C0  = 0x63,
>> +	PM800_CHIP_END = PM800_CHIP_C0,
>> +
>> +	/* Make sure to update this to the last stepping */
>> +	PM8XXX_CHIP_END = PM800_CHIP_END
>> +};
>> +
>> +enum {
>> +	PM800_ID_INVALID,
>> +	PM800_ID_VIBRATOR,
>> +	PM800_ID_SOUND,
>> +	PM800_ID_MAX,
>> +};
>> +
>> +enum {
>> +	PM800_ID_BUCK1 = 0,
>> +	PM800_ID_BUCK2,
>> +	PM800_ID_BUCK3,
> +	PM800_ID_BUCK4,
>> +	PM800_ID_BUCK5,
>
>I would still argue that the majority of the constants in this file
>should get moved into the driver .c file that uses them. Putting them
>into the header is better done only for interfaces between the
>driver parts, and for constants that are used by multiple drivers.
These registers still in this header file are either used by mfd core
driver, regulator/rtc/onkey/codec, or used in platform initial setting.
>> +struct pm80x_subchip {
>> +	struct i2c_client *power_page;	/* chip client for power page */
>> +	struct i2c_client *gpadc_page;	/* chip client for gpadc page */
>> +	struct regmap *regmap_power;
>> +	struct regmap *regmap_gpadc;
>> +	unsigned short power_page_addr;	/* power page I2C address */
>> +	unsigned short gpadc_page_addr;	/* gpadc page I2C address */
>> +};
>> +
>> +struct pm80x_chip {
>> +	struct pm80x_subchip *subchip;
>> +	struct device *dev;
>> +	struct i2c_client *client;
>> +	struct regmap *regmap;
>> +	struct regmap_irq_chip *regmap_irq_chip;
>> +	struct regmap_irq_chip_data *irq_data;
>> +	unsigned char version;
>> +	int id;
>> +	int irq;
>> +	int irq_mode;
>> +	int irq_base;
>> +	unsigned int wu_flag;
>> +};
>
>One thing I forgot to ask in the previous review although I had already
>noticed it then: What is the separation of pm80x_chip and pm80x_subchip
>used for?
Pm80x_chip is common for both pm800 and pm805, while pm80x_subchip
handles the other i2c devices as discussed before, only that these two
i2c devices are not as much as pm800 and pm805 i2c device, and they are
only for gpadc & power settings purpose. The subchip can be treated as
some special feature/function for pm800.
>> +struct pm80x_rtc_pdata {
>> +	int		vrtc;
>> +	int		rtc_wakeup;
>> +};
>> +
>> +struct pm80x_platform_data {
>> +	struct pm80x_rtc_pdata *rtc;
>> +	unsigned short pm800_addr;
>> +	unsigned short pm805_addr;
>> +	unsigned short power_page_addr;	/* power page I2C address */
>> +	unsigned short gpadc_page_addr;	/* gpadc page I2C address */
>> +	int irq_mode;		/* Clear interrupt by read/write(0/1) */
>> +	int irq_base;		/* IRQ base of chip */
>> +	int batt_det;		/* enable/disable */
>> +};
>
>You removed the callback here as I asked you to, which I think is a useful
>cleanup, but you can actually managed to convinced me that it would be ok
>to have it, so I don't mind if you want to put it back and use auxdata.
Actually it's convenient for us to put it back currently, and would use
auxdata instead.
>
>On the other hand, I think it probably makes sense to drop the irq_base
>member in this struct and rely on irq domains to allocate them dynamically
>as mentioned before.
Do you mean that both regmap_add_irq_chip and mfd_add_devices api pass -1 as
the irq_base, so that system can dynamically allocate the irq_base for it?
Given the proper regmap_irq_chip & device resource, is there anything else
needed? As I don't want to miss the exact meaning of " transform the
interrupt numbers using the domain in the client drivers" you mentioned above.
>	Arnd
Arnd,  thanks for your review.

Best Regards
Qiao