On Fri, Jan 09, 2026 at 12:09:11PM +0100, Konrad Dybcio wrote: > On 1/9/26 7:36 AM, [email protected] wrote: > > On 2026-01-08 12:28, Daniel Thompson wrote: > >> On Thu, Jan 08, 2026 at 04:43:20AM +0100, Barnabás Czémán wrote: > >>> WLED4 found in PMI8994 supports different ovp values. > >>> > >>> Fixes: 6fc632d3e3e0 ("video: backlight: qcom-wled: Add PMI8994 > >>> compatible") > >>> Reviewed-by: Konrad Dybcio <[email protected]> > >>> Signed-off-by: Barnabás Czémán <[email protected]> > >>> --- > >>> drivers/video/backlight/qcom-wled.c | 41 > >>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > >>> 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/drivers/video/backlight/qcom-wled.c > >>> b/drivers/video/backlight/qcom-wled.c > >>> index a63bb42c8f8b..5decbd39b789 100644 > >>> --- a/drivers/video/backlight/qcom-wled.c > >>> +++ b/drivers/video/backlight/qcom-wled.c > >>> @@ -1244,6 +1244,15 @@ static const struct wled_var_cfg wled4_ovp_cfg = { > >>> .size = ARRAY_SIZE(wled4_ovp_values), > >>> }; > >>> > >>> +static const u32 pmi8994_wled_ovp_values[] = { > >>> + 31000, 29500, 19400, 17800, > >>> +}; > >>> + > >>> +static const struct wled_var_cfg pmi8994_wled_ovp_cfg = { > >>> + .values = pmi8994_wled_ovp_values, > >>> + .size = ARRAY_SIZE(pmi8994_wled_ovp_values), > >>> +}; > >>> + > >> > >> Do these *have* to be named after one of the two PMICs that implement > >> this OVP range. > >> > >> Would something like wled4_alternative_ovp_values[] (and the same > >> throughout the patch) be more descriptive? > > I don't know. I don't like the PMIC naming either but at least it > > descriptive about wich PMIC is needing these values.
It's the descriptive but wrong element I dislike (pmi8994_wled_ovp_cfg is used by pmi8550). I know these things crop up for "historical reasons" when is appears in the same patchset I have to question the naming. > > I think PMIC naming would be fine if compatibles what representing the > > same configurations would be deprecated and used as a fallback compatbile > > style. > > I mean we could kept the first added compatible for a configuration. > > Maybe they should be named diferently i don't know if WLEDs have subversion. > > Every PMIC peripheral is versioned. > > WLED has separate versioning for the digital and analog parts: > > PMIC ANA DIG > --------------------------- > PMI8937 2.0 1.0 (also needs the quirk) > PMI8950 2.0 1.0 > PMI8994 2.0 1.0 > PMI8996 2.1 1.0 > PMI8998 3.1 3.0 > PM660L 4.1 4.0 > > I don't know for sure if "PMIC4 with WLED ANA/DIG 3.x" a good > discriminant though.. Peronally I'd prefer that to making them all use pmi8994 structures. It's a much better link back to the docs (at least for those with the power to read them ;-) ). Daniel.
