Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] mfd: tps65215: Remove regmap_read check

[Roger Quadros]

On 04/01/2025 00:57, Shree Ramamoorthy wrote:
> The chipid macro/variable and regmap_read function call is not needed
> because the TPS65219_REG_TI_DEV_ID register value is not a consistent value
> across TPS65219 PMIC config versions. Reading from the DEV_ID register
> without a consistent value to compare it to isn't useful. There isn't a
> way to verify the match data ID is the same ID read from the DEV_ID device
> register. 0xF0 isn't a DEV_ID value consistent across TPS65219 NVM
> configurations.
> 
> For TPS65215, there is a consistent value in bits 5-0 of the DEV_ID
> register. However, there are other error checks in place within probe()
> that apply to both PMICs rather than keeping this isolated check for one
> PMIC.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Shree Ramamoorthy <s-ramamoorthy@xxxxxx>

In that case this could be squashed with 1?

> ---
>  drivers/mfd/tps65219.c       | 6 ------
>  include/linux/mfd/tps65219.h | 2 --
>  2 files changed, 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/tps65219.c b/drivers/mfd/tps65219.c
> index 816b271990a2..d3267bf7cd77 100644
> --- a/drivers/mfd/tps65219.c
> +++ b/drivers/mfd/tps65219.c
> @@ -382,12 +382,6 @@ static int tps65219_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
>  	if (ret)
>  		return ret;
>  
> -	ret = regmap_read(tps->regmap, TPS65219_REG_TI_DEV_ID, &tps->chip_id);
> -	if (ret) {
> -		dev_err(tps->dev, "Failed to read device ID: %d\n", ret);
> -		return ret;
> -	}
> -
>  	ret = devm_mfd_add_devices(tps->dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO,
>  				   pmic->cells, pmic->n_cells,
>  				   NULL, 0, regmap_irq_get_domain(tps->irq_data));
> diff --git a/include/linux/mfd/tps65219.h b/include/linux/mfd/tps65219.h
> index 9892b6e4c85c..535115bfa4a4 100644
> --- a/include/linux/mfd/tps65219.h
> +++ b/include/linux/mfd/tps65219.h
> @@ -15,8 +15,6 @@
>  #include <linux/regmap.h>
>  #include <linux/regulator/driver.h>
>  
> -/* TPS chip id list */
> -#define TPS65219					0xF0
>  /* Chip id list*/
>  enum pmic_id {
>  	TPS65215,

Looking at TRM, TPS65215 device_id is 0x15 and TPS6521901 device_id is 0x00.

shouldn't we use that here as well?

-- 
cheers,
-roger