On 2026-01-09 14:33, Daniel Thompson wrote:

On Fri, Jan 09, 2026 at 12:09:11PM +0100, Konrad Dybcio wrote:

quoted

On 1/9/26 7:36 AM, barnabas.czeman@mainlining.org wrote:

quoted

On 2026-01-08 12:28, Daniel Thompson wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Jan 08, 2026 at 04:43:20AM +0100, Barnabás Czémán wrote:

quoted

WLED4 found in PMI8994 supports different ovp values.

Fixes: 6fc632d3e3e0 ("video: backlight: qcom-wled: Add PMI8994 compatible")
Reviewed-by: Konrad Dybcio <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Barnabás Czémán <redacted>
---
 drivers/video/backlight/qcom-wled.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/video/backlight/qcom-wled.c b/drivers/video/backlight/qcom-wled.c
index a63bb42c8f8b..5decbd39b789 100644
--- a/drivers/video/backlight/qcom-wled.c
+++ b/drivers/video/backlight/qcom-wled.c

@@ -1244,6 +1244,15 @@ static const struct wled_var_cfg wled4_ovp_cfg = {

     .size = ARRAY_SIZE(wled4_ovp_values),
 };

+static const u32 pmi8994_wled_ovp_values[] = {
+    31000, 29500, 19400, 17800,
+};
+
+static const struct wled_var_cfg pmi8994_wled_ovp_cfg = {
+    .values = pmi8994_wled_ovp_values,
+    .size = ARRAY_SIZE(pmi8994_wled_ovp_values),
+};
+

Do these *have* to be named after one of the two PMICs that implement
this OVP range.

Would something like wled4_alternative_ovp_values[] (and the same
throughout the patch) be more descriptive?

I don't know. I don't like the PMIC naming either but at least it
descriptive about wich PMIC is needing these values.

It's the descriptive but wrong element I dislike (pmi8994_wled_ovp_cfg
is used by pmi8550).

No, pmi8950 is using pmi8994_wled_opts struct what is using 
pmi8994_wled_ovp_cfg.

I know these things crop up for "historical reasons" when is appears in
the same patchset I have to question the naming.

quoted

quoted

I think PMIC naming would be fine if compatibles what representing the
same configurations would be deprecated and used as a fallback compatbile
style.
I mean we could kept the first added compatible for a configuration.
Maybe they should be named diferently i don't know if WLEDs have subversion.

Every PMIC peripheral is versioned.

WLED has separate versioning for the digital and analog parts:

PMIC		ANA	DIG
---------------------------
PMI8937		2.0	1.0 (also needs the quirk)
PMI8950		2.0	1.0
PMI8994		2.0	1.0
PMI8996		2.1	1.0
PMI8998		3.1	3.0
PM660L		4.1	4.0

I don't know for sure if "PMIC4 with WLED ANA/DIG 3.x" a good
discriminant though..

Peronally I'd prefer that to making them all use pmi8994 structures.
It's a much better link back to the docs (at least for those with the
power to read them ;-) ).


Daniel.