[1/2] gpio: tps68470: Allow building as module

The gpio-tps68470 driver binds to a tps68470-gpio platform-device which
itself gets instantiated by a special MFD driver from
drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/tps68470.c

This MFD driver itself can be build as a module, so it makes no sense to
force the gpio-tps68470 driver to always be builtin.

Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
---
 drivers/gpio/Kconfig         | 6 +-----
 drivers/gpio/gpio-tps68470.c | 6 +++++-
 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

On Sat, Dec 25, 2021 at 2:00 PM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> The gpio-tps68470 driver binds to a tps68470-gpio platform-device which
> itself gets instantiated by a special MFD driver from
> drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/tps68470.c
>
> This MFD driver itself can be build as a module, so it makes no sense to

built

> force the gpio-tps68470 driver to always be builtin.

built-in

Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
(see one minor comment below)

> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpio/Kconfig         | 6 +-----
>  drivers/gpio/gpio-tps68470.c | 6 +++++-
>  2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/Kconfig b/drivers/gpio/Kconfig
> index 60d9374c72c0..3ac5860e0aeb 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpio/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/Kconfig
> @@ -1393,7 +1393,7 @@ config GPIO_TPS65912
>           This driver supports TPS65912 GPIO chip.
>
>  config GPIO_TPS68470
> -       bool "TPS68470 GPIO"
> +       tristate "TPS68470 GPIO"
>         depends on INTEL_SKL_INT3472
>         help
>           Select this option to enable GPIO driver for the TPS68470
> @@ -1403,10 +1403,6 @@ config GPIO_TPS68470
>           input or output as appropriate, the sensor related GPIOs
>           are "output only" GPIOs.
>
> -         This driver config is bool, as the GPIO functionality
> -         of the TPS68470 must be available before dependent
> -         drivers are loaded.
> -
>  config GPIO_TQMX86
>         tristate "TQ-Systems QTMX86 GPIO"
>         depends on MFD_TQMX86 || COMPILE_TEST
> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-tps68470.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-tps68470.c
> index 423b7bc30ae8..ce12c5a54fd4 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-tps68470.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-tps68470.c
> @@ -155,4 +155,8 @@ static struct platform_driver tps68470_gpio_driver = {
>         .probe = tps68470_gpio_probe,
>  };

>

You may remove this blank line.

> -builtin_platform_driver(tps68470_gpio_driver)
> +module_platform_driver(tps68470_gpio_driver);
> +
> +MODULE_ALIAS("platform:tps68470-gpio");
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("GPIO driver for TPS68470 PMIC");
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
> --
> 2.33.1
>

On Sat, Dec 25, 2021 at 04:41:58PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 25, 2021 at 2:00 PM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > The gpio-tps68470 driver binds to a tps68470-gpio platform-device which
> > itself gets instantiated by a special MFD driver from
> > drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/tps68470.c
> >
> > This MFD driver itself can be build as a module, so it makes no sense to
> 
> built
> 
> > force the gpio-tps68470 driver to always be builtin.
> 
> built-in
> 
> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
> (see one minor comment below)

I don't see the next version, in any case it's too far from the beginning of
the v5.16 cycle and I gave my tags so Bart may (or may not :-) apply them. If
it's okay to be v5.18 material, I'll take a new version sent after v5.17-rc1.

Hi,

On 1/4/22 15:08, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 25, 2021 at 04:41:58PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Sat, Dec 25, 2021 at 2:00 PM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> The gpio-tps68470 driver binds to a tps68470-gpio platform-device which
>>> itself gets instantiated by a special MFD driver from
>>> drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/tps68470.c
>>>
>>> This MFD driver itself can be build as a module, so it makes no sense to
>>
>> built
>>
>>> force the gpio-tps68470 driver to always be builtin.
>>
>> built-in
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
>> (see one minor comment below)
> 
> I don't see the next version, in any case it's too far from the beginning of
> the v5.16 cycle and I gave my tags so Bart may (or may not :-) apply them. If
> it's okay to be v5.18 material, I'll take a new version sent after v5.17-rc1.

It is fine for this to go into v5.18, thank you for your review. I'll send
a new version addressing your comments.

Regards,

Hans