Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: qcom: pm7250b: make SID configurable

[Luca Weiss]

On Wed May 10, 2023 at 12:05 PM CEST, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 10/05/2023 10:34, Luca Weiss wrote:
> > On Wed May 10, 2023 at 10:07 AM CEST, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> >> On Wed, 10 May 2023 at 09:55, Krzysztof Kozlowski
> >> <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 10/05/2023 08:47, Luca Weiss wrote:
> >>>> Hi Krzysztof,
> >>>>
> >>>> On Fri Apr 7, 2023 at 10:27 AM CEST, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >>>>> On 07/04/2023 09:45, Luca Weiss wrote:
> >>>>>> Like other Qualcomm PMICs the PM7250B can be used on different addresses
> >>>>>> on the SPMI bus. Use similar defines like the PMK8350 to make this
> >>>>>> possible.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <luca.weiss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>>> ---
> >>>>>>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm7250b.dtsi | 23 ++++++++++++++++-------
> >>>>>>  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm7250b.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm7250b.dtsi
> >>>>>> index daa6f1d30efa..eeb476edc79a 100644
> >>>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm7250b.dtsi
> >>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm7250b.dtsi
> >>>>>> @@ -7,6 +7,15 @@
> >>>>>>  #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/irq.h>
> >>>>>>  #include <dt-bindings/spmi/spmi.h>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> +/* This PMIC can be configured to be at different SIDs */
> >>>>>> +#ifndef PM7250B_SID
> >>>>>> +   #define PM7250B_SID 2
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Drop indentation, although anyway I am against this. Please don't bring
> >>>>> new patterns of this at least till we settle previous discussion.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/46658cbb-fff5-e98b-fdad-88fa683a9c75@xxxxxxxxxx/
> >>>>
> >>>> What's the outcome of the discussion? For this PMIC it's totally enough
> >>>> to have the SID configurable like in this patch, I don't think this PMIC
> >>>> will be included twice in a board - at least I'm not aware of such a
> >>>> configuration.
> >>>
> >>> We did not reach consensus and I still disagree with complex macros or
> >>> macros depending on order of inclusion.
> >>
> >> I still think we should find a way to parametrise PMIC dtsi, however I
> >> agree with Krzysztof that complex CPP is not a way to go.
> > 
> > What about the macro already used in-tree and proposed with this patch?
> > I wouldn't say this is a "complex macro" since it's just a single number
> > being replaced in a few places.
>
> Are you talking about the macro to which I responded: "or macros
> depending on order of inclusion." or something else?

I thought you mean with ..

> >>> We did not reach consensus and I still disagree with complex macros or
> >>> macros depending on order of inclusion.

.. the macros proprosed in the patch you linked (that version that also
adjusts the labels based on the SID).

I was asking if the patch I sent (with #define PM7250B_SID) would be
okay to take in at least until the bigger discussion has come to a
conclusion, since we already have upstream occurances of such a macro so
it's not a new concept.

Otherwise I'll just carry this patch in my local tree until this
situation has cleared up.

Regards
Luca

>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof