El 03/09/2025 a las 16:01, Lee Jones escribió:
>> patch series and thus make it a proper MFD (at the cost of delaying
>> even further the GPIO inclusion), or keep the struct mfd_cell array
>> as a single-element array and implement the watchdog later on another
>> merge request, using that very same array.
>>
>> I am however not okay with wasting my time rewriting that to bypass
>> the MFD API for this, so I can waste even more time later
>> implementing again the MFD API, just because linguistically
>> one (right now) is technically not "multi".
>
> I don't get this. If you implement the WDT now, you will be "multi", so
> what are you protesting against?
That GPIO is something required to perform the poweroff sequence, a must
for any machine, while WDT is just a "nice to have".
Implementing now the WDT just because of a linguistic preference means
delaying something more important in favour of a "nice to have".
>> That seems very unreasonable, specially when it wouldn't be a first
>> since at least these other devices are also using MFD with a single
>> device:
>>
>> - 88pm80
>
> % grep name drivers/mfd/88pm800.c
> .name = "88pm80x-rtc",
> .name = "88pm80x-onkey",
> .name = "88pm80x-regulator",
> .name = "88pm800",
If you open the file, you'll see it uses five single-element arrays.
>> - 88pm805
>
> % grep name drivers/mfd/88pm805.c
> .name = "88pm80x-codec",
> .name = "88pm805",
>
Same as above.
>> - at91-usart
>
> % grep NAME drivers/mfd/at91-usart.c
> MFD_CELL_NAME("at91_usart_spi");
> MFD_CELL_NAME("atmel_usart_serial");
Has two single-element arrays. It registers one or the other, never both
(just like my patch does!)
>> - stw481x
>
> * Copyright (C) 2013 ST-Ericsson SA
>
>> - vx855
>
> * Copyright (C) 2009 VIA Technologies, Inc.
>
>> - wm8400
>
> * Copyright 2008 Wolfson Microelectronics PLC.
>
To my knowledge the definition of "multi" has not been changed
since any of those years.
