Re: [PATCH v5 4/6] mfd: tps65219: Add driver for TI TPS65219 PMIC

[jerome Neanne <jneanne@baylibre.com>]

On 31/10/2022 15:48, Biju Das wrote:
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/6] mfd: tps65219: Add driver for TI TPS65219
>> PMIC
>>
>>
>>
>> On 31/10/2022 12:13, Biju Das wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>> Subject: [PATCH v5 4/6] mfd: tps65219: Add driver for TI TPS65219
>>>> PMIC
>>>>
>>>> The TPS65219 is a power management IC PMIC designed to supply a
>> wide
>>>> range of SoCs in both portable and stationary applications. Any SoC
>>>> can control
>>>> TPS65219 over a standard I2C interface.
>>>>
>>>> It contains the following components:
>>>> - Regulators.
>>>> - Over Temperature warning and Shut down.
>>>> - GPIOs
>>>> - Multi Function Pins (MFP)
>>>> - power-button
>>>>
>>>> This patch adds support for tps65219 PMIC. At this time only the
>>>> functionalities listed below are made available:
>>>>
>>>> - Regulators probe and functionalities
>>>> - warm and cold reset support
>>>> - SW shutdown support
>>>> - Regulator warnings via IRQs
>>>> - Power-button via IRQ
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Jerome Neanne <jneanne@baylibre.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Markus Schneider-Pargmann <msp@baylibre.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>    MAINTAINERS                  |   1 +
>>>>    drivers/mfd/Kconfig          |  14 ++
>>>>    drivers/mfd/Makefile         |   1 +
>>>>    drivers/mfd/tps65219.c       | 320
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>    include/linux/mfd/tps65219.h | 345
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>    5 files changed, 681 insertions(+)
>>>>    create mode 100644 drivers/mfd/tps65219.c  create mode 100644
>>>> include/linux/mfd/tps65219.h
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS index
>>>> f35b29ffd5fb..960df879c635 100644
>>>> --- a/MAINTAINERS
>>>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS
>>>> @@ -14926,6 +14926,7 @@ F:	drivers/mfd/menelaus.c
>>>>    F:	drivers/mfd/palmas.c
>>>>    F:	drivers/mfd/tps65217.c
>>>>    F:	drivers/mfd/tps65218.c
>>>> +F:	drivers/mfd/tps65219.c
>>>>    F:	drivers/mfd/tps65910.c
>>>>    F:	drivers/mfd/twl-core.[ch]
>>>>    F:	drivers/mfd/twl4030*.c
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/Kconfig b/drivers/mfd/Kconfig index
>>>> abb58ab1a1a4..1a846c7dd0c2 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/mfd/Kconfig
>>>> +++ b/drivers/mfd/Kconfig
>>>> @@ -1576,6 +1576,20 @@ config MFD_TPS65218
>>>>    	  This driver can also be built as a module.  If so, the module
>>>>    	  will be called tps65218.
>>>>
>>>> +config MFD_TPS65219
>>>> +	tristate "TI TPS65219 Power Management IC"
>>>> +	depends on I2C && OF
>>>> +	select MFD_CORE
>>>> +	select REGMAP_I2C
>>>> +	select REGMAP_IRQ
>>>> +	help
>>>> +	  If you say yes here you get support for the TPS65219 series of
>>>> Power
>>>> +	  Management ICs. These include voltage regulators, GPIOs and
>>>> +	  push/power button that are often used in portable devices.
>>>> +
>>>> +	  This driver can also be built as a module. If so, the module
>>>> +	  will be called tps65219.
>>>> +
>>>>    config MFD_TPS6586X
>>>>    	bool "TI TPS6586x Power Management chips"
>>>>    	depends on I2C=y
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/Makefile b/drivers/mfd/Makefile index
>>>> 858cacf659d6..a8ff3d6ea3ab 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/mfd/Makefile
>>>> +++ b/drivers/mfd/Makefile
>>>> @@ -101,6 +101,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_TPS6507X)		+= tps6507x.o
>>>>    obj-$(CONFIG_MFD_TPS65086)	+= tps65086.o
>>>>    obj-$(CONFIG_MFD_TPS65217)	+= tps65217.o
>>>>    obj-$(CONFIG_MFD_TPS65218)	+= tps65218.o
>>>> +obj-$(CONFIG_MFD_TPS65219)	+= tps65219.o
>>>>    obj-$(CONFIG_MFD_TPS65910)	+= tps65910.o
>>>>    obj-$(CONFIG_MFD_TPS65912)	+= tps65912-core.o
>>>>    obj-$(CONFIG_MFD_TPS65912_I2C)	+= tps65912-i2c.o
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/tps65219.c b/drivers/mfd/tps65219.c new
>> file
>>>> mode
>>>> 100644 index 000000000000..c1638483e069
>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>> +++ b/drivers/mfd/tps65219.c
>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,320 @@
>>>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
>>>> +//
>>>> +// Driver for TPS65219 Integrated Power Management Integrated
>> Chips
>>>> +(PMIC) // // Copyright (C) 2022 BayLibre Incorporated -
>>>> +
>>>> +
>>>> +static int tps65219_restart(struct notifier_block *this,
>>>> +			    unsigned long reboot_mode, void *cmd) {
>>>> +	struct tps65219 *tps;
>>>> +
>>>> +	tps = container_of(this, struct tps65219, nb);
>>>> +	if (!tps) {
>>>> +		pr_err("tps65219: Restarting failed because the pointer to
>>>> tps65219 is invalid\n");
>>> Why not dev_error?
>> Because I can't get correct device then: if !tps, I can't get tps->dev
>> Then can't reference device in dev_error. Do you have a better
>> suggestion than this pr_err?
> 
> How container_of can fail?
>
Good point. This check sounds useless. I'll just remove then...

Thanks for highlighting this.

Jerome.