[PATCH v2 1/2] regulator: act8945a: add regulator driver for ACT8945A

[Yang, Wenyou]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Korsgaard [mailto:jacmet at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Peter Korsgaard
> Sent: 2016年1月14日 15:28
> To: Yang, Wenyou <Wenyou.Yang at atmel.com>
> Cc: Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood at gmail.com>; Mark Brown <broonie at kernel.org>;
> Rob Herring <robh+dt at kernel.org>; Pawel Moll <pawel.moll at arm.com>; Mark
> Rutland <mark.rutland at arm.com>; Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree at hellion.org.uk>;
> Kumar Gala <galak at codeaurora.org>; Krzysztof Kozlowski
> <k.kozlowski at samsung.com>; devicetree at vger.kernel.org; Ferre, Nicolas
> <Nicolas.FERRE at atmel.com>; linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org; Javier Martinez
> Canillas <javier at dowhile0.org>; Lee Jones <lee.jones at linaro.org>; linux-arm-
> kernel at lists.infradead.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] regulator: act8945a: add regulator driver for
> ACT8945A
> 
> >>>>> "Yang," == Yang, Wenyou <Wenyou.Yang at atmel.com> writes:
> 
>  >> Isn't the regulator part of the act8945a identical to act8865? Can't we just use
> the  >> existing act8865-regulator.c driver? (E.G. support 8865 variant in the mfd
> driver,  >> but only register the regulator sub device?)
> 
>  > Yes, the regulator part of the act8945a is identical to act8865.
> 
>  > But the act8865-regulator driver is a struct i2c_driver, and the mfd  > sub-
> device driver is a platform_driver driver, it is not easy to use  > it.
> 
> But the mfd driver could support the act8865 variant as well (by only registering
> the regulator mfd cell).

I still don't understand.

The MFD sub device is registered as a platform device, the existing act8865 driver is registered as an i2c_driver. How do they match? :)

Could you point out which exiting driver for me to reference.  Thank you!


Best Regards,
Wenyou Yang