Re: [PATCH 2/3] arm64: dts: qcom: pm8998: Add adc node

[Doug Anderson]

Hi,

On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 10:10 AM, Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 05:09:17PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 12:13 PM, Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > This adds the adc node to pm8998 based on the examples in the
>> > bindings. It also fixes the order of the included headers.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > ---
>> >  arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm8998.dtsi | 13 ++++++++++++-
>> >  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm8998.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm8998.dtsi
>> > index 92bed1e7d4bb..f70f6101bceb 100644
>> > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm8998.dtsi
>> > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm8998.dtsi
>> > @@ -1,8 +1,9 @@
>> >  // SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0+ OR MIT)
>> >  /* Copyright 2018 Google LLC. */
>> >
>> > -#include <dt-bindings/spmi/spmi.h>
>> > +#include <dt-bindings/iio/qcom,spmi-vadc.h>
>> >  #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/irq.h>
>> > +#include <dt-bindings/spmi/spmi.h>
>> >
>> >  &spmi_bus {
>> >         pm8998_lsid0: pmic@0 {
>> > @@ -11,6 +12,16 @@
>> >                 #address-cells = <1>;
>> >                 #size-cells = <0>;
>> >
>> > +               pm8998_adc: adc@3100 {
>> > +                       compatible = "qcom,spmi-adc-rev2";
>> > +                       reg = <0x3100>;
>> > +                       interrupts = <0x0 0x31 0x0 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
>> > +                       #address-cells = <1>;
>> > +                       #size-cells = <0>;
>> > +                       #io-channel-cells = <1>;
>> > +                       io-channel-ranges;
>> > +               };
>>
>> I'm a little confused about what the "io-channel-ranges" does here.
>> The documentation isn't clear at all to me for it.  If I'm reading it
>> right it's also supposed to be for iio-consumers, but you're using it
>> in a provider.  I see you copied this from the example.  Maybe the
>> example is wrong?  ...or I'm just confused...
>
> Yes, I copied it from the example, its use here is also not clear to
> me, other ADC providers like adc@126c0000 in exynos3250.dtsi or
> adc@180a6000 in bcm-cygnus.dtsi also specify it ...
>
> Siddartha/Jonathan, could you help to clarify if "io-channel-ranges"
> should really be specified here as the DT example suggests?

Does everything work if you just remove the "io-channel-ranges"?  We
could remove it and always add it back in later if someone could
explain what it's for or if we find a reason why it was needed?  ...or
we have any other ideas for how to get this resolved?  :(

-Doug