Re: [PATCH 4/6] mfd: qcom-pm8008: Add PM8010 support

[Jishnu Prakash]

On 9/21/2026 7:03 PM, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> On 9/18/26 6:42 PM, Jishnu Prakash wrote:

...

>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/qcom-pm8008.c b/drivers/mfd/qcom-pm8008.c
>> index 60204cc9a2dc..ed656f0d6df2 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mfd/qcom-pm8008.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mfd/qcom-pm8008.c
>> @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ enum {
>>  	PM8008_GPIO1,
>>  	PM8008_GPIO2,
>>  	PM8008_NUM_PERIPHS,
>> +	PM8010_NUM_PERIPHS = 2,
>>  };
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/qcom-pm8008.c b/drivers/mfd/qcom-pm8008.c
> index 8408d045e754..84c2d50545af 100644
> --- a/drivers/mfd/qcom-pm8008.c
> +++ b/drivers/mfd/qcom-pm8008.c
> @@ -35,7 +35,9 @@
>  enum {
>         PM8008_MISC,
>         PM8008_TEMP_ALARM,
> -       PM8008_GPIO1,
> +       /* The GPIOs on PM8010 are fixed-function */
> +       PM8010_NUM_PERIPHS,
> +       PM8008_GPIO1 = PM8010_NUM_PERIPHS,
>         PM8008_GPIO2,
>         PM8008_NUM_PERIPHS,
> 
> 
> or drop the GPIO support altogether, if we conclude that they are
> fixed-function on PM8008 too (I couldn't find clear info)
> 

Hi Konrad,

>From what I could see in the relevant HW documents, the GPIO
functions are fixed on both PM8008 and PM8010, so it would
be best to drop it from the driver. I can a separate fix
change for this.

Do you think we also need to make binding and DT changes
for dropping this GPIO support?

Thanks,
Jishnu

> Konrad