lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Dec]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v6 05/15] mfd: bd71828: Support ROHM BD71828 PMIC - core
Date
Hello Lee,

On Mon, 2019-12-16 at 16:46 +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Dec 2019, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
>
> > BD71828GW is a single-chip power management IC for battery-powered
> > portable
> > devices. The IC integrates 7 buck converters, 7 LDOs, and a 1500 mA
> > single-cell linear charger. Also included is a Coulomb counter, a
> > real-time
> > clock (RTC), 3 GPO/regulator control pins, HALL input and a 32.768
> > kHz
> > clock gate.
> >
> > Add MFD core driver providing interrupt controller facilities and
> > i2c
> > access to sub device drivers.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@fi.rohmeurope.com>
> > ---
> >
> > Changes since v5:
> > - No changes
> >
> > drivers/mfd/Kconfig | 15 ++
> > drivers/mfd/Makefile | 2 +-
> > drivers/mfd/rohm-bd71828.c | 319 +++++++++++++++++++++++
> > include/linux/mfd/rohm-bd71828.h | 425
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > include/linux/mfd/rohm-generic.h | 1 +
> > 5 files changed, 761 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > create mode 100644 drivers/mfd/rohm-bd71828.c
> > create mode 100644 include/linux/mfd/rohm-bd71828.h
>
> Couple of small nits. Once fixed, please apply my:
>
> For my own reference:
> Acked-for-MFD-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
>
> > diff --git a/drivers/mfd/Kconfig b/drivers/mfd/Kconfig
> > index 420900852166..c3c9432ef51c 100644
> > --- a/drivers/mfd/Kconfig
> > +++ b/drivers/mfd/Kconfig
> > @@ -1906,6 +1906,21 @@ config MFD_ROHM_BD70528
> > 10 bits SAR ADC for battery temperature monitor and 1S
> > battery
> > charger.
> >
> > +config MFD_ROHM_BD71828
> > + tristate "ROHM BD71828 Power Management IC"
> > + depends on I2C=y
> > + depends on OF
> > + select REGMAP_I2C
> > + select REGMAP_IRQ
> > + select MFD_CORE
> > + help
> > + Select this option to get support for the ROHM BD71828 Power
> > + Management IC. BD71828GW is a single-chip power management IC
> > for
> > + battery-powered portable devices. The IC integrates 7 buck
> > + converters, 7 LDOs, and a 1500 mA single-cell linear charger.
> > + Also included is a Coulomb counter, a real-time clock (RTC),
> > and
> > + a 32.768 kHz clock gate.
> > +
> > config MFD_STM32_LPTIMER
> > tristate "Support for STM32 Low-Power Timer"
> > depends on (ARCH_STM32 && OF) || COMPILE_TEST
> > diff --git a/drivers/mfd/Makefile b/drivers/mfd/Makefile
> > index aed99f08739f..ca2d55c679c5 100644
> > --- a/drivers/mfd/Makefile
> > +++ b/drivers/mfd/Makefile
> > @@ -252,6 +252,6 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_MFD_MXS_LRADC) += mxs-lradc.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_MFD_SC27XX_PMIC) += sprd-sc27xx-spi.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_RAVE_SP_CORE) += rave-sp.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_MFD_ROHM_BD70528) += rohm-bd70528.o
> > +obj-$(CONFIG_MFD_ROHM_BD71828) += rohm-bd71828.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_MFD_ROHM_BD718XX) += rohm-bd718x7.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_MFD_STMFX) += stmfx.o
> > -
>
> Nit: This is an unrelated change and should not really be in this
> patch.

Ok. Will get rid of it.

>
> > diff --git a/drivers/mfd/rohm-bd71828.c b/drivers/mfd/rohm-
> > bd71828.c
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..7f445d699fd9
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/drivers/mfd/rohm-bd71828.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,319 @@
> > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
> > +//
> > +// Copyright (C) 2019 ROHM Semiconductors
> > +//
> > +// ROHM BD71828 PMIC driver
> > +
//snip

> > +
> > +static struct i2c_driver bd71828_drv = {
> > + .driver = {
> > + .name = "rohm-bd71828",
> > + .of_match_table = bd71828_of_match,
> > + },
> > + .probe_new = &bd71828_i2c_probe,
> > +};
> > +
>
> Nit: You can remove this line.

Will do.

>
> > +module_i2c_driver(bd71828_drv);
> > +
> > +MODULE_AUTHOR("Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@fi.rohmeurope.com>
> > ");
> > +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("ROHM BD71828 Power Management IC driver");
> > +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
>
> This does not match the header.

How is that? This is what is stated in module.h for the
MODULE_LICENSE:

/*
* The following license idents are currently accepted as indicating
free
* software modules
*
* "GPL" [GNU Public License v2]
* "GPL v2" [GNU Public License v2]
* "GPL and additional rights" [GNU Public License v2 rights
and more]
* "Dual BSD/GPL" [GNU Public License v2
* or BSD license choice]
* "Dual MIT/GPL" [GNU Public License v2
* or MIT license choice]
* "Dual MPL/GPL" [GNU Public License v2
* or Mozilla license choice]
*
* The following other idents are available
*
* "Proprietary" [Non free products]
*
* Both "GPL v2" and "GPL" (the latter also in dual licensed strings)
are
* merely stating that the module is licensed under the GPL v2, but are
not
* telling whether "GPL v2 only" or "GPL v2 or later". The reason why
there
* are two variants is a historic and failed attempt to convey more
* information in the MODULE_LICENSE string. For module loading the
* "only/or later" distinction is completely irrelevant and does
neither
* replace the proper license identifiers in the corresponding source
file
* nor amends them in any way. The sole purpose is to make the
* 'Proprietary' flagging work and to refuse to bind symbols which are
* exported with EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL when a non free module is loaded.
*
* In the same way "BSD" is not a clear license information. It merely
* states, that the module is licensed under one of the compatible BSD
* license variants. The detailed and correct license information is
again
* to be found in the corresponding source files.
*
* There are dual licensed components, but when running with Linux it
is the
* GPL that is relevant so this is a non issue. Similarly LGPL linked
with GPL
* is a GPL combined work.
*
* This exists for several reasons
* 1. So modinfo can show license info for users wanting to vet their
setup
* is free
* 2. So the community can ignore bug reports including proprietary
modules
* 3. So vendors can do likewise based on their own policies
*/
#define MODULE_LICENSE(_license) MODULE_INFO(license, _license)
I have no objections on changing the license if needed but can you
please tell me what is Ok combos then - I am having hard time when
trying to select licenses which are acceptable for all.

Br,
Matti Vaittinen
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-12-17 10:40    [W:0.083 / U:20.284 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site