RE: [PATCH v6 5/5] mfd: max77541: Add ADI MAX77541/MAX77540 PMIC Support

[Sahin, Okan]

>On Wed, 15 Mar 2023, Lee Jones wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 07 Mar 2023, Okan Sahin wrote:
>>
>> > MFD driver for MAX77541/MAX77540 to enable its sub devices.
>> >
>> > The MAX77541 is a multi-function devices. It includes buck converter
>> > and ADC.
>> >
>> > The MAX77540 is a high-efficiency buck converter with two 3A
>> > switching phases.
>> >
>> > They have same regmap except for ADC part of MAX77541.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Okan Sahin <okan.sahin@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> > ---
>> >  drivers/mfd/Kconfig          |  13 ++
>> >  drivers/mfd/Makefile         |   1 +
>> >  drivers/mfd/max77541.c       | 224
>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> >  include/linux/mfd/max77541.h |  97 +++++++++++++++
>> >  4 files changed, 335 insertions(+)
>> >  create mode 100644 drivers/mfd/max77541.c  create mode 100644
>> > include/linux/mfd/max77541.h
>>
>> FYI: I'm not re-reviewing this since you've chosen to ignore some of
>> my previous review comments.  Issues highlighted by review comments
>> don't just go away on resubmission.
>
>... and the subject is malformed.
>
>--
>Lee Jones [李琼斯]

Hi Lee,

I am sorry if I missed your review comments, this was not my intention. I want to thank you for your contribution. Your feedbacks are very valuable, and I am trying to understand and fix each one before sending the patch. Indeed, I sorted your feedback on previous patches. As far as I know, I have fixed all of them, is there a problem with any of them that I fixed, or is there any missing review? From you, there were some comments like "why did you use this?", I suppose I need to respond them before sending following patches. I thought I should not bother the maintainers unnecessarily. I am sorry for them.
	
For previous patch(v5), There was feedback from Andy. I did not fix them. 

1) 
> They have same regmap except for ADC part of MAX77541.

Extra space in the Subject.

...

> +#include <linux/of_device.h

This is my fault, I missed this comment. I will fix in following patch(v7).

2)
...

> +static const struct regmap_config max77541_regmap_config = {
> +	.reg_bits   = 8,
> +	.val_bits   = 8,

Do you need lock of regmap?

> +};

...

Since I do not need lock of regmap, I did not change anything in regmap_config (v6). Do I need to answer this question even if I don't need lock of regmap?

For the other reviews, I fixed them as you said. Thank you for your time, and effort. Sorry for the misunderstanding and confusion.

Regards,
Okan