On Sat, 03 Jul 2021, Jonathan Cameron wrote:

On Sat,  3 Jul 2021 10:42:22 +0200
Andreas Kemnade [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

This allows having devicetree nodes for the subdevices.

Signed-off-by: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info>
---
 drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c | 6 ++++--
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c b/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c
index 384acb459427..b916c7471ca3 100644
--- a/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c
+++ b/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c

@@ -24,8 +24,10 @@ static const struct mfd_cell rn5t618_cells[] = {
 };
 
 static const struct mfd_cell rc5t619_cells[] = {
-	{ .name = "rn5t618-adc" },
-	{ .name = "rn5t618-power" },
+	{ .name = "rn5t618-adc",
+	  .of_compatible = "ricoh,rc5t619-adc" },

Odd to have a name of 618 and a compatible of 619.  Why?
Definitely deserves a comment if this is necessary for some reason!

Actually this is the norm.  We have lots of drivers named after the
*first* device they supported before expansion.

quoted

+	{ .name = "rn5t618-power",
+	  .of_compatible = "ricoh,rc5t619-power" },
 	{ .name = "rn5t618-regulator" },
 	{ .name = "rc5t619-rtc" },
 	{ .name = "rn5t618-wdt" },

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Senior Technical Lead - Developer Services
Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog