Re: [RFC PATCH 0/6] Support ROHM BD96801 scalable PMIC

[Mark Brown]

On Thu, May 09, 2024 at 10:03:43AM +0300, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> On 5/9/24 08:08, Mark Brown wrote:

> > > > > > So if we arrange to supply a name when we register multiple domains
> > > > > > things should work fine?

> Thanks for the guidance Mark. The controller name is not a problem. Problem
> is that I don't see a (proper) way to supply a name for the IRQ domain which
> gets registered by regmap-IRQ. IRQ domain code picks the name for the domain
> by the device-tree node. Both of our IRQ controllers would be instantiated
> from same node => the IRQ domain will get same name => debugfs will
> conflict.

That's why I'm suggesting to add something - just put a name field in
the struct.

> My "solution" was simply dropping the ERRB IRQ from the driver (for now at
> least). I did send that as a series without 'RFC' - but made a mistake and
> restarted the versioning from v1. I am currently working with 2 other PMICs,
> one of them does also provide similar setup of two IRQ lines. Thus, I think
> being able to provide a name (suffix?) for IRQ domain when registering it
> instead of just using the name of the DT node is something I should look
> into. It's just nice to know someone else thinks it is valid approach.

Yes.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature