Re: [PATCH v3 07/14] mfd: mt6370: Add Mediatek MT6370 support

Hi Andy,

Thanks for your helpful comments! We have some questions below.

Andy Shevchenko [off-list ref] 於 2022年6月24日 週五 凌晨2:01寫道：

On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 1:59 PM ChiaEn Wu [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

From: ChiYuan Huang <redacted>

Add Mediatek MT6370 MFD support.

...

quoted

+config MFD_MT6370
+       tristate "Mediatek MT6370 SubPMIC"
+       select MFD_CORE
+       select REGMAP_I2C
+       select REGMAP_IRQ
+       depends on I2C
+       help
+         Say Y here to enable MT6370 SubPMIC functional support.
+         It consists of a single cell battery charger with ADC monitoring, RGB
+         LEDs, dual channel flashlight, WLED backlight driver, display bias
+         voltage supply, one general purpose LDO, and the USB Type-C & PD
+         controller complies with the latest USB Type-C and PD standards.

What will be the module name in case it's chosen to be built as a module?

OK, we will add related text in the next patch! Thanks!

...

quoted

 obj-$(CONFIG_INTEL_SOC_PMIC_BXTWC)  += intel_soc_pmic_bxtwc.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_INTEL_SOC_PMIC_CHTWC)     += intel_soc_pmic_chtwc.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_INTEL_SOC_PMIC_CHTDC_TI)  += intel_soc_pmic_chtdc_ti.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_MFD_MT6360)       += mt6360-core.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_MFD_MT6370)       += mt6370.o
 mt6397-objs                    := mt6397-core.o mt6397-irq.o mt6358-irq.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_MFD_MT6397)       += mt6397.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_INTEL_SOC_PMIC_MRFLD)     += intel_soc_pmic_mrfld.o

This whole bunch of drivers is in the wrong place in Makefile.

https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220616182524.7956-2-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com/ (local)

hmm... So shall we need to cherry-pick your this patch first,
then modify the Makefile before the next submission??

...

quoted

+#define MT6370_REG_MAXADDR     0x1FF

Wondering if (BIT(10) - 1) gives a better hint on how hardware limits
this (so it will be clear it's 10-bit address).

well... This "0x1FF" is just a virtual mapping value to map the max
address of the PMU bank(0x1XX).
So, I feel its means is different from using (BIT(10) - 1) here.

...

quoted

+static int mt6370_check_vendor_info(struct mt6370_info *info)
+{
+       unsigned int devinfo;
+       int ret;
+
+       ret = regmap_read(info->regmap, MT6370_REG_DEV_INFO, &devinfo);
+       if (ret)
+               return ret;
+
+       switch (FIELD_GET(MT6370_VENID_MASK, devinfo)) {
+       case MT6370_VENID_RT5081:
+       case MT6370_VENID_RT5081A:
+       case MT6370_VENID_MT6370:
+       case MT6370_VENID_MT6371:
+       case MT6370_VENID_MT6372P:
+       case MT6370_VENID_MT6372CP:

return 0;

quoted

+               break;
+       default:
+               dev_err(info->dev, "Unknown Vendor ID 0x%02x\n", devinfo);
+               return -ENODEV;
+       }
+
+       return 0;

...and drop these two lines?

OK! We will refine it in the next patch!

quoted

+}

...

quoted

+       bank_idx = *(u8 *)reg_buf;
+       bank_addr = *(u8 *)(reg_buf + 1);

Why not

  const u8 *u8_buf = reg_buf;

  bank_idx = u8_buf[0];
  bank_addr = u8_buf[1];

?

We will refine it in the next patch! Thanks!

...

quoted

+       if (ret < 0)
+               return ret;
+       else if (ret != val_size)

Redundant 'else'.

I'm not quite sure what you mean, so I made the following changes first.
------------------------------------
       if (ret < 0)
              return ret;
       if (ret != val_size)
              return -EIO;
------------------------------------
I don't know if it meets your expectations??

quoted

+               return -EIO;

...

quoted

+       bank_idx = *(u8 *)data;
+       bank_addr = *(u8 *)(data + 1);

As per above.

--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

Best regards,
ChiaEn Wu