[1/2] dt-bindings: nvmem: Add SoC compatible for sc7280

Document SoC compatible for sc7280

Signed-off-by: Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@codeaurora.org>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/qcom,qfprom.yaml | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

On Thu, 25 Mar 2021 11:14:15 +0530, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
> Document SoC compatible for sc7280
> 
> Signed-off-by: Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@codeaurora.org>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/qcom,qfprom.yaml | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 

Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>

On 25/03/2021 05:44, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
> Document SoC compatible for sc7280
> 
> Signed-off-by: Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@codeaurora.org>
> ---
>   Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/qcom,qfprom.yaml | 1 +
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/qcom,qfprom.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/qcom,qfprom.yaml
> index 992777c..861b205 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/qcom,qfprom.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/qcom,qfprom.yaml
> @@ -24,6 +24,7 @@ properties:
>             - qcom,msm8998-qfprom
>             - qcom,qcs404-qfprom
>             - qcom,sc7180-qfprom
> +          - qcom,sc7280-qfprom
>             - qcom,sdm845-qfprom
>         - const: qcom,qfprom
>   
> 

Applied both,
thanks,
srini

Hi,

On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 10:45 PM Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>
> @@ -111,6 +113,15 @@ static const struct qfprom_soc_compatible_data sc7180_qfprom = {
>         .nkeepout = ARRAY_SIZE(sc7180_qfprom_keepout)
>  };
>
> +static const struct nvmem_keepout sc7280_qfprom_keepout[] = {
> +       {.start = 0x128, .end = 0x148},
> +       {.start = 0x238, .end = 0x248}
> +};
> +
> +static const struct qfprom_soc_compatible_data sc7280_qfprom = {
> +       .keepout = sc7280_qfprom_keepout,
> +       .nkeepout = ARRAY_SIZE(sc7280_qfprom_keepout)
> +};
>  /**

nit: blank line between structure and comment?


> @@ -187,9 +199,9 @@ static int qfprom_enable_fuse_blowing(const struct qfprom_priv *priv,
>          * a rail shared do don't specify a max--regulator constraints
>          * will handle.
>          */
> -       ret = regulator_set_voltage(priv->vcc, 1800000, INT_MAX);
> +       ret = regulator_set_voltage(priv->vcc, qfprom_blow_uV, INT_MAX);
>         if (ret) {
> -               dev_err(priv->dev, "Failed to set 1.8 voltage\n");
> +               dev_err(priv->dev, "Failed to set %duV\n", qfprom_blow_uV);

nit: the comment above this block (not in the unified diff)
specifically calls out 1.8V. It'd be nice if you updated the comment
since it's no longer fixed at 1.8V.


> @@ -379,6 +399,8 @@ static int qfprom_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>
>                 if (major_version == 7 && minor_version == 8)
>                         priv->soc_data = &qfprom_7_8_data;
> +               if (major_version == 7 && minor_version == 15)
> +                       priv->soc_data = &qfprom_7_15_data;

nit: "else if" instead of "if"?


I guess I'm a little late since I think this already got applied, but
all the above are nits. Maybe you could send a follow-up patch to
address them?

-Doug

On 3/31/2021 2:49 AM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 10:45 PM Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>>
>> @@ -111,6 +113,15 @@ static const struct qfprom_soc_compatible_data sc7180_qfprom = {
>>          .nkeepout = ARRAY_SIZE(sc7180_qfprom_keepout)
>>   };
>>
>> +static const struct nvmem_keepout sc7280_qfprom_keepout[] = {
>> +       {.start = 0x128, .end = 0x148},
>> +       {.start = 0x238, .end = 0x248}
>> +};
>> +
>> +static const struct qfprom_soc_compatible_data sc7280_qfprom = {
>> +       .keepout = sc7280_qfprom_keepout,
>> +       .nkeepout = ARRAY_SIZE(sc7280_qfprom_keepout)
>> +};
>>   /**
> 
> nit: blank line between structure and comment?
> 
> 
>> @@ -187,9 +199,9 @@ static int qfprom_enable_fuse_blowing(const struct qfprom_priv *priv,
>>           * a rail shared do don't specify a max--regulator constraints
>>           * will handle.
>>           */
>> -       ret = regulator_set_voltage(priv->vcc, 1800000, INT_MAX);
>> +       ret = regulator_set_voltage(priv->vcc, qfprom_blow_uV, INT_MAX);
>>          if (ret) {
>> -               dev_err(priv->dev, "Failed to set 1.8 voltage\n");
>> +               dev_err(priv->dev, "Failed to set %duV\n", qfprom_blow_uV);
> 
> nit: the comment above this block (not in the unified diff)
> specifically calls out 1.8V. It'd be nice if you updated the comment
> since it's no longer fixed at 1.8V.
> 
> 
>> @@ -379,6 +399,8 @@ static int qfprom_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>
>>                  if (major_version == 7 && minor_version == 8)
>>                          priv->soc_data = &qfprom_7_8_data;
>> +               if (major_version == 7 && minor_version == 15)
>> +                       priv->soc_data = &qfprom_7_15_data;
> 
> nit: "else if" instead of "if"?
> 
> 
> I guess I'm a little late since I think this already got applied, but
> all the above are nits. Maybe you could send a follow-up patch to
> address them?

Thanks Doug for the review, yes, I'll send a follow-up patch since
Srini already has these pulled in.