From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>,
Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] usb: typec: Copy everything from struct typec_capability during registration
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2019 06:08:17 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9173aabc-3e61-fc9b-e01e-0f1ce78429a2@roeck-us.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191001094858.68643-2-heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>
On 10/1/19 2:48 AM, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> Copying everything from struct typec_capability to struct
> typec_port during port registration.
>
What is the purpose of this patch ? To reduce the number of indirections at
runtime, or to avoid having to have cap around ?
FWIW, it looks like the code doesn't copy _all_ variables (eg cap->try_role),
and it doesn't drop port->cap. Am I missing something ?
> Signed-off-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/usb/typec/class.c | 55 +++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
> 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/typec/class.c b/drivers/usb/typec/class.c
> index 94a3eda62add..3835e2d9fba6 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/typec/class.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/typec/class.c
> @@ -46,8 +46,14 @@ struct typec_port {
> enum typec_role vconn_role;
> enum typec_pwr_opmode pwr_opmode;
> enum typec_port_type port_type;
> + enum typec_port_type fixed_role;
> + enum typec_port_data port_roles;
> + enum typec_accessory accessory[TYPEC_MAX_ACCESSORY];
Would a pointer to cap->accessory be sufficient ? Or is there a reason to copy
the actual array ?
> struct mutex port_type_lock;
>
> + u16 revision;
> + u16 pd_revision;
> +
> enum typec_orientation orientation;
> struct typec_switch *sw;
> struct typec_mux *mux;
> @@ -950,7 +956,7 @@ preferred_role_store(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
> int role;
> int ret;
>
> - if (port->cap->type != TYPEC_PORT_DRP) {
> + if (port->fixed_role != TYPEC_PORT_DRP) {
> dev_dbg(dev, "Preferred role only supported with DRP ports\n");
> return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> }
> @@ -982,7 +988,7 @@ preferred_role_show(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
> {
> struct typec_port *port = to_typec_port(dev);
>
> - if (port->cap->type != TYPEC_PORT_DRP)
> + if (port->fixed_role != TYPEC_PORT_DRP)
> return 0;
>
> if (port->prefer_role < 0)
> @@ -1009,7 +1015,7 @@ static ssize_t data_role_store(struct device *dev,
> return ret;
>
> mutex_lock(&port->port_type_lock);
> - if (port->cap->data != TYPEC_PORT_DRD) {
> + if (port->port_roles != TYPEC_PORT_DRD) {
> ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
> goto unlock_and_ret;
> }
> @@ -1029,7 +1035,7 @@ static ssize_t data_role_show(struct device *dev,
> {
> struct typec_port *port = to_typec_port(dev);
>
> - if (port->cap->data == TYPEC_PORT_DRD)
> + if (port->port_roles == TYPEC_PORT_DRD)
> return sprintf(buf, "%s\n", port->data_role == TYPEC_HOST ?
> "[host] device" : "host [device]");
>
> @@ -1044,7 +1050,7 @@ static ssize_t power_role_store(struct device *dev,
> struct typec_port *port = to_typec_port(dev);
> int ret;
>
> - if (!port->cap->pd_revision) {
> + if (!port->pd_revision) {
> dev_dbg(dev, "USB Power Delivery not supported\n");
> return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> }
> @@ -1064,9 +1070,9 @@ static ssize_t power_role_store(struct device *dev,
> return ret;
>
> mutex_lock(&port->port_type_lock);
> - if (port->port_type != TYPEC_PORT_DRP) {
> + if (port->fixed_role != TYPEC_PORT_DRP) {
This is a semantic change: Previously, it compared the _current_ port type.
Now it compares the initial (fixed) port type. Is this on purpose ?
[ comment written before I noticed the change below. See there. ]
> dev_dbg(dev, "port type fixed at \"%s\"",
> - typec_port_power_roles[port->port_type]);
> + typec_port_power_roles[port->fixed_role]);
> ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
> goto unlock_and_ret;
> }
> @@ -1086,7 +1092,7 @@ static ssize_t power_role_show(struct device *dev,
> {
> struct typec_port *port = to_typec_port(dev);
>
> - if (port->cap->type == TYPEC_PORT_DRP)
> + if (port->fixed_role == TYPEC_PORT_DRP)
> return sprintf(buf, "%s\n", port->pwr_role == TYPEC_SOURCE ?
> "[source] sink" : "source [sink]");
>
> @@ -1102,7 +1108,7 @@ port_type_store(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
> int ret;
> enum typec_port_type type;
>
> - if (!port->cap->port_type_set || port->cap->type != TYPEC_PORT_DRP) {
> + if (!port->cap->port_type_set || port->fixed_role != TYPEC_PORT_DRP) {
> dev_dbg(dev, "changing port type not supported\n");
> return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> }
> @@ -1114,7 +1120,7 @@ port_type_store(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
> type = ret;
> mutex_lock(&port->port_type_lock);
>
> - if (port->port_type == type) {
> + if (port->fixed_role == type) {
This seems wrong.
> ret = size;
> goto unlock_and_ret;
> }
> @@ -1123,7 +1129,7 @@ port_type_store(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
> if (ret)
> goto unlock_and_ret;
>
> - port->port_type = type;
> + port->fixed_role = type;
As does this. It changes the semantics of all checks that used to be against
port->cap->type, except for the one I commented on above. If that is intentional,
the variable name "fixed_role" seems inappropriate.
Overall, I would have thought that "fixed_role" could essentially be a boolean,
set to true if cap->type is not TYPEC_PORT_DRP. That would make the code easier
to understand. Right now I am just confused about the use of port_type vs.
fixed_role.
> ret = size;
>
> unlock_and_ret:
> @@ -1137,11 +1143,11 @@ port_type_show(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
> {
> struct typec_port *port = to_typec_port(dev);
>
> - if (port->cap->type == TYPEC_PORT_DRP)
> + if (port->fixed_role == TYPEC_PORT_DRP)
> return sprintf(buf, "%s\n",
> - typec_port_types_drp[port->port_type]);
> + typec_port_types_drp[port->fixed_role]);
>
> - return sprintf(buf, "[%s]\n", typec_port_power_roles[port->cap->type]);
> + return sprintf(buf, "[%s]\n", typec_port_power_roles[port->fixed_role]);
> }
> static DEVICE_ATTR_RW(port_type);
>
> @@ -1170,7 +1176,7 @@ static ssize_t vconn_source_store(struct device *dev,
> bool source;
> int ret;
>
> - if (!port->cap->pd_revision) {
> + if (!port->pd_revision) {
> dev_dbg(dev, "VCONN swap depends on USB Power Delivery\n");
> return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> }
> @@ -1209,10 +1215,10 @@ static ssize_t supported_accessory_modes_show(struct device *dev,
> ssize_t ret = 0;
> int i;
>
> - for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(port->cap->accessory); i++) {
> - if (port->cap->accessory[i])
> + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(port->accessory); i++) {
> + if (port->accessory[i])
> ret += sprintf(buf + ret, "%s ",
> - typec_accessory_modes[port->cap->accessory[i]]);
> + typec_accessory_modes[port->accessory[i]]);
> }
>
> if (!ret)
> @@ -1229,7 +1235,7 @@ static ssize_t usb_typec_revision_show(struct device *dev,
> char *buf)
> {
> struct typec_port *port = to_typec_port(dev);
> - u16 rev = port->cap->revision;
> + u16 rev = port->revision;
>
> return sprintf(buf, "%d.%d\n", (rev >> 8) & 0xff, (rev >> 4) & 0xf);
> }
> @@ -1241,7 +1247,7 @@ static ssize_t usb_power_delivery_revision_show(struct device *dev,
> {
> struct typec_port *p = to_typec_port(dev);
>
> - return sprintf(buf, "%d\n", (p->cap->pd_revision >> 8) & 0xff);
> + return sprintf(buf, "%d\n", (p->pd_revision >> 8) & 0xff);
> }
> static DEVICE_ATTR_RO(usb_power_delivery_revision);
>
> @@ -1532,6 +1538,7 @@ struct typec_port *typec_register_port(struct device *parent,
> struct typec_port *port;
> int ret;
> int id;
> + int i;
>
> port = kzalloc(sizeof(*port), GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!port)
> @@ -1581,8 +1588,16 @@ struct typec_port *typec_register_port(struct device *parent,
> port->id = id;
> port->cap = cap;
> port->port_type = cap->type;
> + port->fixed_role = cap->type;
> + port->port_roles = cap->data;
> port->prefer_role = cap->prefer_role;
>
> + port->revision = cap->revision;
> + port->pd_revision = cap->pd_revision;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < TYPEC_MAX_ACCESSORY; i++)
> + port->accessory[i] = cap->accessory[i];
> +
> device_initialize(&port->dev);
> port->dev.class = typec_class;
> port->dev.parent = parent;
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-01 13:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-01 9:48 [PATCH 0/7] usb: typec: Small API improvement Heikki Krogerus
2019-10-01 9:48 ` [PATCH 1/7] usb: typec: Copy everything from struct typec_capability during registration Heikki Krogerus
2019-10-01 13:08 ` Guenter Roeck [this message]
2019-10-02 16:06 ` Heikki Krogerus
2019-10-02 16:36 ` Guenter Roeck
2019-10-02 18:29 ` Heikki Krogerus
2019-10-03 3:45 ` Guenter Roeck
2019-10-03 8:03 ` Heikki Krogerus
2019-10-02 19:16 ` Heikki Krogerus
2019-10-03 3:51 ` Guenter Roeck
2019-10-03 13:29 ` Heikki Krogerus
2019-10-01 9:48 ` [PATCH 2/7] usb: typec: Introduce typec_get_drvdata() Heikki Krogerus
2019-10-01 9:48 ` [PATCH 3/7] usb: typec: Separate the operations vector Heikki Krogerus
2019-10-01 13:22 ` Guenter Roeck
2019-10-04 8:45 ` Heikki Krogerus
2019-10-01 9:48 ` [PATCH 4/7] usb: typec: tcpm: Start using struct typec_operations Heikki Krogerus
2019-10-01 13:30 ` Guenter Roeck
2019-10-04 8:46 ` Heikki Krogerus
2019-10-01 9:48 ` [PATCH 5/7] usb: typec: tps6598x: " Heikki Krogerus
2019-10-01 13:34 ` Guenter Roeck
2019-10-01 13:35 ` Guenter Roeck
2019-10-04 8:49 ` Heikki Krogerus
2019-10-01 9:48 ` [PATCH 6/7] usb: typec: ucsi: " Heikki Krogerus
2019-10-01 13:35 ` Guenter Roeck
2019-10-01 9:48 ` [PATCH 7/7] usb: typec: Remove the callback members from struct typec_capability Heikki Krogerus
2019-10-01 13:37 ` Guenter Roeck
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=9173aabc-3e61-fc9b-e01e-0f1ce78429a2@roeck-us.net \
--to=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=hdegoede@redhat.com \
--cc=heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).