On 07. 05. 25 5:26 odp., Lee Jones wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2025, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Wed, May 07, 2025 at 03:56:37PM +0200, Ivan Vecera wrote:
On 07. 05. 25 3:41 odp., Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 3:45 PM Ivan Vecera <ivecera@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
...
+static const struct zl3073x_pdata zl3073x_pdata[ZL3073X_MAX_CHANNELS] = {
+ { .channel = 0, },
+ { .channel = 1, },
+ { .channel = 2, },
+ { .channel = 3, },
+ { .channel = 4, },
+};
+static const struct mfd_cell zl3073x_devs[] = {
+ ZL3073X_CELL("zl3073x-dpll", 0),
+ ZL3073X_CELL("zl3073x-dpll", 1),
+ ZL3073X_CELL("zl3073x-dpll", 2),
+ ZL3073X_CELL("zl3073x-dpll", 3),
+ ZL3073X_CELL("zl3073x-dpll", 4),
+};
+#define ZL3073X_MAX_CHANNELS 5
Btw, wouldn't be better to keep the above lists synchronised like
1. Make ZL3073X_CELL() to use indexed variant
[idx] = ...
2. Define the channel numbers
and use them in both data structures.
...
WDYM?
OTOH, I'm not sure why we even need this. If this is going to be
sequential, can't we make a core to decide which cell will be given
which id?
Just a note that after introduction of PHC sub-driver the array will look
like:
static const struct mfd_cell zl3073x_devs[] = {
ZL3073X_CELL("zl3073x-dpll", 0), // DPLL sub-dev for chan 0
ZL3073X_CELL("zl3073x-phc", 0), // PHC sub-dev for chan 0
ZL3073X_CELL("zl3073x-dpll", 1), // ...
ZL3073X_CELL("zl3073x-phc", 1),
ZL3073X_CELL("zl3073x-dpll", 2),
ZL3073X_CELL("zl3073x-phc", 2),
ZL3073X_CELL("zl3073x-dpll", 3),
ZL3073X_CELL("zl3073x-phc", 3),
ZL3073X_CELL("zl3073x-dpll", 4),
ZL3073X_CELL("zl3073x-phc", 4), // PHC sub-dev for chan 4
};
Ah, this is very important piece. Then I mean only this kind of change
enum {
// this or whatever meaningful names
..._CH_0 0
..._CH_1 1
...
};
static const struct zl3073x_pdata zl3073x_pdata[ZL3073X_MAX_CHANNELS] = {
{ .channel = ..._CH_0, },
...
};
static const struct mfd_cell zl3073x_devs[] = {
ZL3073X_CELL("zl3073x-dpll", ..._CH_0),
ZL3073X_CELL("zl3073x-phc", ..._CH_0),
...
};
This is getting hectic. All for a sequential enumeration. Seeing as
there are no other differentiations, why not use IDA in the child
instead?
For that, there have to be two IDAs, one for DPLLs and one for PHCs...
The approach in my second reply in this thread is simpler and taken
in v8.
<cite>
+#define ZL3073X_PDATA(_channel) \
+ (&(const struct zl3073x_pdata) { \
+ .channel = _channel, \
+ })
+
+#define ZL3073X_CELL(_name, _channel) \
+ MFD_CELL_BASIC(_name, NULL, ZL3073X_PDATA(_channel), \
+ sizeof(struct zl3073x_pdata), 0)
+
+static const struct mfd_cell zl3073x_devs[] = {
+ ZL3073X_CELL("zl3073x-dpll", 0),
+ ZL3073X_CELL("zl3073x-dpll", 1),
+ ZL3073X_CELL("zl3073x-dpll", 2),
+ ZL3073X_CELL("zl3073x-dpll", 3),
+ ZL3073X_CELL("zl3073x-dpll", 4),
+};
</cite>
Lee, WDYT?
Thanks,
Ivan
