[PATCH v2 4/4] mfd: max77686: Split out regulator part from the DT binding

Krzysztof Kozlowski k.kozlowski at samsung.com
Fri Jul 17 00:11:11 PDT 2015

2015-07-17 15:59 GMT+09:00 Javier Martinez Canillas <javier at osg.samsung.com>:
> Hello Krzysztof,
> On 07/17/2015 08:49 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> 2015-07-17 15:46 GMT+09:00 Javier Martinez Canillas <javier at osg.samsung.com>:
>>> Hello Krzysztof,
>>> On 07/17/2015 08:42 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> 2015-07-17 15:29 GMT+09:00 Javier Martinez Canillas <javier at osg.samsung.com>:
>>>>> The Maxim MAX77686 PMIC is a multi-function device with regulators,
>>>>> clocks and a RTC. The DT bindings for the clocks are in a separate
>>>>> file but the bindings for the regulators are inside the mfd part.
>>>>> To make it consistent with the clocks portion of the binding and
>>>>> because is more natural to look for regulator bindings under the
>>>>> bindings/regulator sub-directory, split the regulator portion of
>>>>> the DT binding and add it as a separate file.
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <javier at osg.samsung.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> Changes in v2:
>>>>> - Use a generic name for the max77686 node in the regulator example.
>>>>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/max77686.txt | 58 +-----------------
>>>>>  .../devicetree/bindings/regulator/max77686.txt     | 71 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>  2 files changed, 74 insertions(+), 55 deletions(-)
>>>>>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/max77686.txt
>>>> Putting regulator bindings under regulator directory seems logical so
>>>> I am fine with it.
>>>> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski at samsung.com>
>>> Thanks a lot for your review. For completeness, I talked with Lee Jones
>>> over IRC yesterday asking him his opinion on whether MFD DT binding doc
>>> should contain all the info or if it should be split across different
>>> subsystems and he prefers the later. That's why I re-spun this series.
>> Okay, this sounds good.
>> One more thing - can you update the maintainers file? The bindings
>> documentation is mentioned there for max77686.
> Sure, I see that also the max77802 files are missing in that section.
> I'll included that as well.

The max717802 are not there because they are not part of this
maintainership :) . I wasn't involved in development of them (except
reviewing) so I did not put myself as their maintainer.

> But I'll wait to see if Lee pick this
> series before posting the patch for MAINTAINERS.

I think the maintainers should be updated in the same patchset (or
even patch) to keep the state consistent.

Best regards,

More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list