On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 05:30:37PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 12/05/2023 14:28, Charles Keepax wrote:
- priv->gpio_chip.fwnode = dev_fwnode(cs42l43->dev);
- if (is_of_node(dev_fwnode(cs42l43->dev))) {
device_set_node(priv->dev,fwnode_get_named_child_node(dev_fwnode(cs42l43->dev),"pinctrl"));That's something unusual. It seems you want to bind to a DT node because you miss compatible in DT node?
Kinda, I don't really want to add multiple compatibles for the device. This is just a CODEC device, even in device tree it seems a little weird to have multiple compatibles for a single I2C device. On ACPI I am pretty sure it would be considered flat out right wrong. The fact Linux supports the device using multiple drivers is seemed to be a Linux implementation detail, rather than describing the hardware.
The original (internal) version of the patches just had a single firmware node, but the DT schema would not verify because the node is both a pinctrl node and a spi node. And the pinctrl schema requires the node to be called "pinctrl" and the spi requires it to be called "spi", it is impossible to satisfy both.
Any advice/guidance you had on this one would be greatly appreciated?
- } else {
device_set_node(priv->dev, dev_fwnode(cs42l43->dev));- }
- pm_runtime_enable(priv->dev);
- pm_runtime_idle(priv->dev);
+MODULE_DESCRIPTION("CS42L43 Pinctrl Driver"); +MODULE_AUTHOR("Charles Keepax ckeepax@opensource.cirrus.com"); +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL"); +MODULE_ALIAS("platform:cs42l43-pinctrl");
Same comment, so I guess you have this pattern everywhere.
Yeah this is not problem to fix up, I was just unaware using the id_table was preferrable for MFD components, there are a lot of devices doing it both ways.
Thanks, Charles