Re: [PATCH 0/3] Support PMIC operation region for CrystalCove and XPower

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Wednesday, November 12, 2014 09:48:10 AM Aaron Lu wrote:
> On 11/12/2014 07:35 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Tuesday, November 11, 2014 11:11:52 AM Lee Jones wrote:
> >> On Tue, 11 Nov 2014, Aaron Lu wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 10/31/2014 02:08 PM, Aaron Lu wrote:
> >>>> On Intel Baytrail-T and Baytrail-T-CR platforms, there are two customized
> >>>> ACPI operation regions defined for the Power Management Integrated Circuit
> >>>> device, one is for power resource handling and one is for thermal: sensor
> >>>> temperature reporting, trip point setting, etc. There are different PMIC
> >>>> chips used on those platforms and though each has the same two operation
> >>>> regions and functionality, their implementation is different so every PMIC
> >>>> will need a driver. But since their functionality is similar, some common
> >>>> code is abstracted into the intel_soc_pmic_opregion.c.
> >>>>
> >>>> The last version is posted here:
> >>>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/9/8/801
> >>>>
> >>>> Changes since then:
> >>>> 1 Move to drivers/acpi as discussed on the above thread;
> >>>> 2 Added support for XPower AXP288 PMIC operation region support;
> >>>> 3 Since operation region handler can not be removed(at the moment at least),
> >>>>   use bool for the two operation region driver configs instead of tristate;
> >>>>   Another reason to do this is that, with Mika's MFD ACPI support patch, all
> >>>>   those MFD cell devices created will have the same modalias as their parent's
> >>>>   so it doesn't make much sense to compile these drivers into modules.
> >>>>
> >>>> Patch 1 applies on top of Rafael's pm-next branch, and then patch 2 and
> >>>> patch 3 needs merge of Lee's mfd/ib-mfd-iio-3.19 branch where the PMIC
> >>>> driver XPower AXP288 and iio driver axp288_adc is located.
> >>>
> >>> Since patch 2-3 are based on top of the mfd/ib-mfd-iio-3.19 branch, it
> >>> would be easy to go through the mfd/ib-mfd-iio-3.19 branch.
> >>>
> >>> Rafael,
> >>> Can I get your ACK for the three patches?
> >>>
> >>> Lee,
> >>> Can you please take the series if Rafael gives it ack?
> >>
> >> Yes, no problem.
> > 
> > Well, since the code is going to reside mostly in drivers/acpi, I think I should
> > be applying the patches and from your response it looks like you are fine with
> > them.  Is that correct?
> 
> Oh I thought you may not want to merge another branch into your next
> branch so I asked this question. If you can handle the whole thing in your
> tree, that's of course not a problem :-)

Merging one more branch wouldn't be a problem, but we'll take care of that
later.

For now, would it be possible to rename the subdir to "pmic" instead of
"pmic_opregion"?  The "_opregion" part doesn't seem to add much value here.

And can the names of the files be somewhat shorter too?  Like "intel_pmic.[h][c]"
and "intel_pmic_crc.c"?


-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/