Re: [PATCH V2 2/2] regulator: mt6323: Add support for MT6323 regulator

[John Crispin]

On 25/01/2016 15:01, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> Hello John,
> 
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 10:46 AM, John Crispin <blogic@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 25/01/2016 14:25, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 10:19 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas
>>> <javier@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>>>
>>>> In fact, the kernel is currently not matching the compatible, it is
>>>> only matching because you provided a .of_compatible is provided in the
>>>> mfd_cell.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sorry my English was a bit off in this paragraph...
>>>
>>> I tried to say that OF does not traverse MFD sub-devices and lookups a
>>> device driver that matches the compatible automatically since a MFD
>>> device is not a bus. Currently it is only trying to match a compatible
>>> string because the mfd_cell has a .of_compatible set so an of_node is
>>> assigned on mfd_add_device().
>>>
>>> But it is failing to match because no OF device table is provided and
>>> the platform bus match callback is falling back to the driver .name to
>>> match so the compatible is not really used as Mark said.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Javier
>>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> just so i am sure to have understood properly. i just need to drop the
>> compatible string from [1/2] and resend. if this is the case i will fix
>> the mt6397 binding doc while at it.
>>
> 
> And you will also need to remove the .of_compatible =
> "mediatek,mt6323-regulator" from patch "[PATCH V2 4/4] mfd: mediatek:
> add MT6323 support to MT6397 driver" since otherwise an
> MODALIAS=of:foo will be reported instead of an MODALIAS=platform:foo
> 
> But if I were you, I would keep the MFD driver and DT binding as they
> are and provide a .id_table and .of_match_table to the mt6323
> regulator platform driver.
> 
> I'll write patches for the mt6397 regulator driver adding those tables
> since it has the same issue and you can see what I mean.
> 
>>         John
> 
> Best regards,
> Javier
> 

Hi Javier,

fine i'll do that then. thanks for the elaborate explanation.

	John