[U-Boot] [PATCH 08/16] pmic:muic: Support for MUIC built into MAX8997 device

[Lukasz Majewski]

Hi Stefano,

> On 14/09/2012 17:40, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
> > Support for MUIC (Micro USB Integrated Circuit) built into the
> > MAX8997 power management device.
> > 
> > The MUIC device will work with redesigned PMIC framework.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski at samsung.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park at samsung.com>
> > Cc: Stefano Babic <sbabic at denx.de>
> > ---
> 
> Hi Lukasz,
> 
> >  drivers/misc/Makefile        |    1 +
> >  drivers/misc/muic_max8997.c  |   80
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > include/power/max8997_muic.h |   61
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ include/power/power_chrg.h   |
> > 1 + 4 files changed, 143 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) create mode
> > 100644 drivers/misc/muic_max8997.c create mode 100644
> > include/power/max8997_muic.h
> > 
> 
> I see now with this patch, but we have a mix between drivers/misc and
> drivers/power. I think this was done because the power directory was
> introduced later, but really all pmics under drivers/misc should be
> moved into drivers/power.
> 
> Maybe belong this one also to drivers/power ?
> 
> You added several "add-ons" for MAX8997. Maybe it is clearer if
> everything goes into a separate directory, such as power/max8997/
> 
> > diff --git a/drivers/misc/Makefile b/drivers/misc/Makefile
> > index 271463c..f08a800 100644
> > --- a/drivers/misc/Makefile
> > +++ b/drivers/misc/Makefile
> > @@ -41,6 +41,7 @@ COBJS-$(CONFIG_PMIC_I2C) += pmic_i2c.o
> >  COBJS-$(CONFIG_PMIC_SPI) += pmic_spi.o
> >  COBJS-$(CONFIG_PMIC_MAX8998) += pmic_max8998.o
> >  COBJS-$(CONFIG_PMIC_MAX8997) += pmic_max8997.o
> > +COBJS-$(CONFIG_POWER_MUIC_MAX8997) += muic_max8997.o
> >  
> >  COBJS	:= $(COBJS-y)
> >  SRCS	:= $(COBJS:.o=.c)
> > diff --git a/drivers/misc/muic_max8997.c
> > b/drivers/misc/muic_max8997.c new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000..d332c09
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/drivers/misc/muic_max8997.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,80 @@
> > +/*
> > + *  Copyright (C) 2012 Samsung Electronics
> > + *  Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski at samsung.com>
> > + *
> > + * See file CREDITS for list of people who contributed to this
> > + * project.
> > + *
> > + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
> > + * modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as
> > + * published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of
> > + * the License, or (at your option) any later version.
> > + *
> > + * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
> > + * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> > + * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
> > + * GNU General Public License for more details.
> > + *
> > + * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public
> > License
> > + * along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
> > + * Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston,
> > + * MA 02111-1307 USA
> > + */
> > +
> > +#include <common.h>
> > +#include <power/pmic.h>
> > +#include <power/power_chrg.h>
> > +#include <power/max8997_muic.h>
> > +#include <i2c.h>
> > +
> > +int power_muic_init(unsigned int bus)
> 
> You add a different function to initialize it, but this is a version
> opf pmic_init(). Why cannot we consider this one as all other pmics,
> avoiding to introduce new and undocumented functions ?
> 
> If I do not misunderstand, you use the different functions to select
> the pmic. In other words, calling power_update_battery() in the trats
> code selects automatically the fulel-gauge, because this code
> implements this function. But this is against the goal of your
> patches, that is to add multi instances of the pmics (and maybe a
> second instance of fuel_gauge..).
> 
> I think this should be solved moving this function to the general API
> and calling it via pointer. For example, something like:
> 
> 	p = pmic_get("MAX_8997);
> 	p->read(...);
> 	
> 	p = pmic_get("MAX17042_FG");
> 	p->power_update_battery(..);
> 
> What do you think ?

I think that struct pmic shall be extended by another field:

struct pmic {
struct power_ops *p_ops;
};

struct bat_ops {
	int (*check_battery) (struct pmic *p);
	int (*update_battery) (struct pmic *p);
	int (*init_battery) (struct pmic *p);	

	[other battery related callbacks]
};

Each instance of struct bat_ops is tied with power related device.

I will post v2 of the framework very soon.


-- 
Best regards,

Lukasz Majewski

Samsung Poland R&D Center | Linux Platform Group