From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932100AbeFEXK4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jun 2018 19:10:56 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-f66.google.com ([74.125.82.66]:54565 "EHLO mail-wm0-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752954AbeFEXKw (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jun 2018 19:10:52 -0400 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKLV+8zeW31Hm/bmBWzj74m0n4H2fC35YbPpZ7lkCpEPRppkYXmRo/sh4sqV3TnU5s4E4tEtBA== Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 07/10] mfd: da9063: Add custom IRQ map for DA9063L To: Steve Twiss , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Cc: Marek Vasut , Geert Uytterhoeven , Lee Jones , Mark Brown , Wolfram Sang , "linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org" , Support Opensource References: <20180602101155.26375-1-marek.vasut+renesas@gmail.com> <20180602101155.26375-7-marek.vasut+renesas@gmail.com> <6ED8E3B22081A4459DAC7699F3695FB701941AD6EC@SW-EX-MBX02.diasemi.com> From: Marek Vasut Message-ID: <34944098-1b33-7847-8309-1aeb2a6ff4db@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2018 00:58:19 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <6ED8E3B22081A4459DAC7699F3695FB701941AD6EC@SW-EX-MBX02.diasemi.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 06/05/2018 09:52 PM, Steve Twiss wrote: > Hi Marek, Hi, > Thanks. > > On 02 June 2018 11:12, Marek Vasut wrote, > >> Subject: [PATCH v3 07/10] mfd: da9063: Add custom IRQ map for DA9063L >> >> While the datasheet for DA9063L (2v1, 23-Mar-2017) lists the RTC register >> block, the DA9063L does not have an RTC. Add custom IRQ map for DA9063L to >> ignore the Alarm and Tick IRQs from the PMIC. > > I've added a request to remove the RTC references from the DA9063L datasheet. > > Adding that first part to the sentence in the commit log: "While the datasheet for DA9063L > (2v1, 23-Mar-2017) lists the RTC register block" is just pointing out an ambiguity from the > datasheet since the it also identifies those registers in Table 102 on page 126 as > "Reserved". > > I would like to suggest, the commit log entry: "Add custom IRQ map for DA9063L to ignore > the Alarm and Tick IRQs from the PMIC". OK, I'll hide it. >> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut >> Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven >> Cc: Lee Jones >> Cc: Mark Brown >> Cc: Steve Twiss >> Cc: Wolfram Sang >> Cc: linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org >> --- >> V3: New patch >> --- >> drivers/mfd/da9063-irq.c | 55 >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- >> 1 file changed, 53 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/da9063-irq.c b/drivers/mfd/da9063-irq.c >> index 5b406ecfc14a..b6a88861cc2e 100644 >> --- a/drivers/mfd/da9063-irq.c >> +++ b/drivers/mfd/da9063-irq.c >> @@ -74,8 +74,55 @@ static const struct regmap_irq_chip da9063_irq_chip = { >> .init_ack_masked = true, >> }; >> >> +static const struct regmap_irq da9063l_irqs[] = { >> + /* DA9063 event A register */ >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_ONKEY, >> DA9063_REG_EVENT_A_OFFSET, DA9063_M_ONKEY), >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_ADC_RDY, >> DA9063_REG_EVENT_A_OFFSET, DA9063_M_ADC_RDY), >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_SEQ_RDY, >> DA9063_REG_EVENT_A_OFFSET, DA9063_M_SEQ_RDY), >> + /* DA9063 event B register */ >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_WAKE, >> DA9063_REG_EVENT_B_OFFSET, DA9063_M_WAKE), >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_TEMP, >> DA9063_REG_EVENT_B_OFFSET, DA9063_M_TEMP), >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_COMP_1V2, >> DA9063_REG_EVENT_B_OFFSET, DA9063_M_COMP_1V2), >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_LDO_LIM, >> DA9063_REG_EVENT_B_OFFSET, DA9063_M_LDO_LIM), >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_REG_UVOV, >> DA9063_REG_EVENT_B_OFFSET, DA9063_M_UVOV), >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_DVC_RDY, >> DA9063_REG_EVENT_B_OFFSET, DA9063_M_DVC_RDY), >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_VDD_MON, >> DA9063_REG_EVENT_B_OFFSET, DA9063_M_VDD_MON), >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_WARN, >> DA9063_REG_EVENT_B_OFFSET, DA9063_M_VDD_WARN), >> + /* DA9063 event C register */ >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI0, DA9063_REG_EVENT_C_OFFSET, >> DA9063_M_GPI0), >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI1, DA9063_REG_EVENT_C_OFFSET, >> DA9063_M_GPI1), >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI2, DA9063_REG_EVENT_C_OFFSET, >> DA9063_M_GPI2), >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI3, DA9063_REG_EVENT_C_OFFSET, >> DA9063_M_GPI3), >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI4, DA9063_REG_EVENT_C_OFFSET, >> DA9063_M_GPI4), >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI5, DA9063_REG_EVENT_C_OFFSET, >> DA9063_M_GPI5), >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI6, DA9063_REG_EVENT_C_OFFSET, >> DA9063_M_GPI6), >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI7, DA9063_REG_EVENT_C_OFFSET, >> DA9063_M_GPI7), >> + /* DA9063 event D register */ >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI8, DA9063_REG_EVENT_D_OFFSET, >> DA9063_M_GPI8), >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI9, DA9063_REG_EVENT_D_OFFSET, >> DA9063_M_GPI9), >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI10, >> DA9063_REG_EVENT_D_OFFSET, DA9063_M_GPI10), >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI11, >> DA9063_REG_EVENT_D_OFFSET, DA9063_M_GPI11), >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI12, >> DA9063_REG_EVENT_D_OFFSET, DA9063_M_GPI12), >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI13, >> DA9063_REG_EVENT_D_OFFSET, DA9063_M_GPI13), >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI14, >> DA9063_REG_EVENT_D_OFFSET, DA9063_M_GPI14), >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI15, >> DA9063_REG_EVENT_D_OFFSET, DA9063_M_GPI15), >> +}; >> + >> +static const struct regmap_irq_chip da9063l_irq_chip = { >> + .name = "da9063l-irq", >> + .irqs = da9063l_irqs, >> + .num_irqs = DA9063_NUM_IRQ, > > Isn't the number of IRQs in the DA9063L different to the standard DA9063 > because of the missing RTC? I think this can even be replaced by ARRAY_SIZE() ? -- Best regards, Marek Vasut