From: Brad Larson <brad@pensando.io> To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> Cc: linux-arm Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>, Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@gmail.com>, Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>, Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>, "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>, linux-spi <linux-spi@vger.kernel.org>, linux-mmc <linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org>, devicetree <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] gpio: Add Elba SoC gpio driver for spi cs control Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2021 18:10:16 -0700 [thread overview] Message-ID: <CAK9rFnxgdyxM11n6PaqG_phuDMXnHYWSm+Xaqg89dMYCF3CN8g@mail.gmail.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CAHp75VcG9KajNpDbewDq7QzotB6t7MfwiGk15FaobX+cmMVSzg@mail.gmail.com> Hi Andy, On Sun, Mar 7, 2021 at 11:21 AM Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 4, 2021 at 4:40 PM Brad Larson <brad@pensando.io> wrote: > > > > This GPIO driver is for the Pensando Elba SoC which > > provides control of four chip selects on two SPI busses. > > I will try to avoid repeating otheris in their reviews, but my comments below. > > ... > > > +config GPIO_ELBA_SPICS > > + bool "Pensando Elba SPI chip-select" > > Can't it be a module? Why? > > > + depends on ARCH_PENSANDO_ELBA_SOC > > + help > > + Say yes here to support the Pensndo Elba SoC SPI chip-select driver > > Please give more explanation what it is and why users might need it, > and also tell users how the module will be named (if there is no > strong argument why it can't be a module). > > ... > > > +#include <linux/of.h> > > It's not used here, but you missed mod_devicetable.h. Based on the feedback I realized this should not be a loadable module. I should be using builtin_platform_driver(elba_spics_driver). Currently I have this for gpio/Kconfig config GPIO_ELBA_SPICS def_bool y depends on ARCH_PENSANDO_ELBA_SOC || COMPILE_TEST > > +/* > > + * pin: 3 2 | 1 0 > > + * bit: 7------6------5------4----|---3------2------1------0 > > + * cs1 cs1_ovr cs0 cs0_ovr | cs1 cs1_ovr cs0 cs0_ovr > > + * ssi1 | ssi0 > > + */ > > +#define SPICS_PIN_SHIFT(pin) (2 * (pin)) > > +#define SPICS_MASK(pin) (0x3 << SPICS_PIN_SHIFT(pin)) > > > +#define SPICS_SET(pin, val) ((((val) << 1) | 0x1) << SPICS_PIN_SHIFT(pin)) > > Isn't it easier to define as ((value) << (2 * (pin) + 1) | BIT(2 * (pin))) Both are functionally correct. I don't have a preference, do you want this change? > > +struct elba_spics_priv { > > + void __iomem *base; > > + spinlock_t lock; > > > + struct gpio_chip chip; > > If you put it as a first member a container_of() becomes a no-op. OTOH > dunno if there is any such container_of() use in the code. There is no use of container_of() for this structure > > +static int elba_spics_get_value(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int pin) > > +{ > > + return -ENXIO; > > Hmm... Is it really acceptable error code here? No it's not, thanks. Changed to -ENOTSUPP as gpio output direction only is supported. > > +static int elba_spics_direction_input(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int pin) > > +{ > > + return -ENXIO; > > Ditto. Changed to ENOTSUPP > > + res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0); > > + p->base = devm_ioremap_resource(&pdev->dev, res); > > p->base = devm_platform_ioremap_resource(pdev, 0); Changed to single call to devm_platform_ioremap_resource(pdev, 0) > > + if (IS_ERR(p->base)) { > > > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to remap I/O memory\n"); > > Duplicate noisy message. Removed extra log message > > + return PTR_ERR(p->base); > > + } > > > + ret = devm_gpiochip_add_data(&pdev->dev, &p->chip, p); > > + if (ret) { > > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "unable to add gpio chip\n"); > > > + return ret; > > + } > > + > > + dev_info(&pdev->dev, "elba spics registered\n"); > > + return 0; > > if (ret) > dev_err(...); > return ret; Yes, made this change and will include in v3 patchset --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-elba-spics.c +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-elba-spics.c @@ -91,13 +91,9 @@ static int elba_spics_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) ret = devm_gpiochip_add_data(&pdev->dev, &p->chip, p); - if (ret) { + if (ret) dev_err(&pdev->dev, "unable to add gpio chip\n"); - return ret; - } - - dev_info(&pdev->dev, "elba spics registered\n"); - return 0; + return ret; Regards, Brad
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Brad Larson <brad@pensando.io> To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> Cc: linux-arm Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>, Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@gmail.com>, Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>, Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>, "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>, linux-spi <linux-spi@vger.kernel.org>, linux-mmc <linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org>, devicetree <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] gpio: Add Elba SoC gpio driver for spi cs control Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2021 18:10:16 -0700 [thread overview] Message-ID: <CAK9rFnxgdyxM11n6PaqG_phuDMXnHYWSm+Xaqg89dMYCF3CN8g@mail.gmail.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CAHp75VcG9KajNpDbewDq7QzotB6t7MfwiGk15FaobX+cmMVSzg@mail.gmail.com> Hi Andy, On Sun, Mar 7, 2021 at 11:21 AM Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 4, 2021 at 4:40 PM Brad Larson <brad@pensando.io> wrote: > > > > This GPIO driver is for the Pensando Elba SoC which > > provides control of four chip selects on two SPI busses. > > I will try to avoid repeating otheris in their reviews, but my comments below. > > ... > > > +config GPIO_ELBA_SPICS > > + bool "Pensando Elba SPI chip-select" > > Can't it be a module? Why? > > > + depends on ARCH_PENSANDO_ELBA_SOC > > + help > > + Say yes here to support the Pensndo Elba SoC SPI chip-select driver > > Please give more explanation what it is and why users might need it, > and also tell users how the module will be named (if there is no > strong argument why it can't be a module). > > ... > > > +#include <linux/of.h> > > It's not used here, but you missed mod_devicetable.h. Based on the feedback I realized this should not be a loadable module. I should be using builtin_platform_driver(elba_spics_driver). Currently I have this for gpio/Kconfig config GPIO_ELBA_SPICS def_bool y depends on ARCH_PENSANDO_ELBA_SOC || COMPILE_TEST > > +/* > > + * pin: 3 2 | 1 0 > > + * bit: 7------6------5------4----|---3------2------1------0 > > + * cs1 cs1_ovr cs0 cs0_ovr | cs1 cs1_ovr cs0 cs0_ovr > > + * ssi1 | ssi0 > > + */ > > +#define SPICS_PIN_SHIFT(pin) (2 * (pin)) > > +#define SPICS_MASK(pin) (0x3 << SPICS_PIN_SHIFT(pin)) > > > +#define SPICS_SET(pin, val) ((((val) << 1) | 0x1) << SPICS_PIN_SHIFT(pin)) > > Isn't it easier to define as ((value) << (2 * (pin) + 1) | BIT(2 * (pin))) Both are functionally correct. I don't have a preference, do you want this change? > > +struct elba_spics_priv { > > + void __iomem *base; > > + spinlock_t lock; > > > + struct gpio_chip chip; > > If you put it as a first member a container_of() becomes a no-op. OTOH > dunno if there is any such container_of() use in the code. There is no use of container_of() for this structure > > +static int elba_spics_get_value(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int pin) > > +{ > > + return -ENXIO; > > Hmm... Is it really acceptable error code here? No it's not, thanks. Changed to -ENOTSUPP as gpio output direction only is supported. > > +static int elba_spics_direction_input(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int pin) > > +{ > > + return -ENXIO; > > Ditto. Changed to ENOTSUPP > > + res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0); > > + p->base = devm_ioremap_resource(&pdev->dev, res); > > p->base = devm_platform_ioremap_resource(pdev, 0); Changed to single call to devm_platform_ioremap_resource(pdev, 0) > > + if (IS_ERR(p->base)) { > > > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to remap I/O memory\n"); > > Duplicate noisy message. Removed extra log message > > + return PTR_ERR(p->base); > > + } > > > + ret = devm_gpiochip_add_data(&pdev->dev, &p->chip, p); > > + if (ret) { > > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "unable to add gpio chip\n"); > > > + return ret; > > + } > > + > > + dev_info(&pdev->dev, "elba spics registered\n"); > > + return 0; > > if (ret) > dev_err(...); > return ret; Yes, made this change and will include in v3 patchset --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-elba-spics.c +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-elba-spics.c @@ -91,13 +91,9 @@ static int elba_spics_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) ret = devm_gpiochip_add_data(&pdev->dev, &p->chip, p); - if (ret) { + if (ret) dev_err(&pdev->dev, "unable to add gpio chip\n"); - return ret; - } - - dev_info(&pdev->dev, "elba spics registered\n"); - return 0; + return ret; Regards, Brad _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-08-23 1:10 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 102+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-03-04 3:41 [PATCH 0/8] Support Pensando Elba SoC Brad Larson 2021-03-04 3:41 ` Brad Larson 2021-03-04 3:41 ` [PATCH 1/8] gpio: Add Elba SoC gpio driver for spi cs control Brad Larson 2021-03-04 3:41 ` Brad Larson 2021-03-04 8:29 ` Linus Walleij 2021-03-04 8:29 ` Linus Walleij 2021-03-04 9:10 ` Serge Semin 2021-03-04 9:10 ` Serge Semin 2021-03-04 13:38 ` Linus Walleij 2021-03-04 13:38 ` Linus Walleij 2021-08-23 1:05 ` Brad Larson 2021-08-23 1:05 ` Brad Larson 2021-08-29 21:09 ` Linus Walleij 2021-08-29 21:09 ` Linus Walleij 2021-10-04 16:46 ` Brad Larson 2021-10-04 16:46 ` Brad Larson 2021-10-12 23:51 ` Linus Walleij 2021-10-12 23:51 ` Linus Walleij 2021-10-14 20:06 ` Brad Larson 2021-10-14 20:06 ` Brad Larson 2021-03-30 2:44 ` Brad Larson 2021-03-30 2:44 ` Brad Larson 2021-08-23 1:05 ` Brad Larson 2021-08-23 1:05 ` Brad Larson 2021-03-04 20:43 ` Elliott, Robert (Servers) 2021-03-04 20:43 ` Elliott, Robert (Servers) 2021-08-23 1:06 ` Brad Larson 2021-08-23 1:06 ` Brad Larson 2021-03-05 11:25 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2021-03-05 11:25 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2021-08-23 1:07 ` Brad Larson 2021-08-23 1:07 ` Brad Larson 2021-03-05 13:57 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2021-03-05 13:57 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2021-08-23 1:08 ` Brad Larson 2021-08-23 1:08 ` Brad Larson 2021-03-07 19:21 ` Andy Shevchenko 2021-03-07 19:21 ` Andy Shevchenko 2021-03-29 1:19 ` Brad Larson 2021-03-29 1:19 ` Brad Larson 2021-03-29 10:39 ` Andy Shevchenko 2021-03-29 10:39 ` Andy Shevchenko 2021-08-23 1:13 ` Brad Larson 2021-08-23 1:13 ` Brad Larson 2021-08-23 7:50 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2021-08-23 7:50 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2021-08-23 16:30 ` Brad Larson 2021-08-23 16:30 ` Brad Larson 2021-08-23 20:11 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2021-08-23 20:11 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2021-10-04 17:14 ` Brad Larson 2021-10-04 17:14 ` Brad Larson 2021-10-04 17:16 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2021-10-04 17:16 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2021-08-23 1:10 ` Brad Larson [this message] 2021-08-23 1:10 ` Brad Larson 2021-03-04 3:41 ` [PATCH 2/8] spi: cadence-quadspi: Add QSPI support for Pensando Elba SoC Brad Larson 2021-03-04 3:41 ` Brad Larson 2021-03-04 9:29 ` Arnd Bergmann 2021-03-04 9:29 ` Arnd Bergmann 2021-03-04 3:41 ` [PATCH 3/8] spi: dw: Add support for Pensando Elba SoC SPI Brad Larson 2021-03-04 3:41 ` Brad Larson 2021-03-04 6:44 ` Serge Semin 2021-03-04 6:44 ` Serge Semin 2021-08-23 1:17 ` Brad Larson 2021-08-23 1:17 ` Brad Larson 2021-03-04 8:48 ` Linus Walleij 2021-03-04 8:48 ` Linus Walleij 2021-03-10 3:52 ` Brad Larson 2021-03-10 3:52 ` Brad Larson 2021-03-04 3:41 ` [PATCH 4/8] spidev: Add Pensando CPLD compatible Brad Larson 2021-03-04 3:41 ` Brad Larson 2021-03-04 9:33 ` Arnd Bergmann 2021-03-04 9:33 ` Arnd Bergmann 2021-03-04 3:41 ` [PATCH 5/8] mmc: sdhci-cadence: Add Pensando Elba SoC support Brad Larson 2021-03-04 3:41 ` Brad Larson 2021-03-04 9:41 ` Arnd Bergmann 2021-03-04 9:41 ` Arnd Bergmann 2021-03-04 3:41 ` [PATCH 6/8] arm64: Add config for Pensando SoC platforms Brad Larson 2021-03-04 3:41 ` Brad Larson 2021-03-04 9:42 ` Arnd Bergmann 2021-03-04 9:42 ` Arnd Bergmann 2021-03-04 3:41 ` [PATCH 7/8] arm64: dts: Add Pensando Elba SoC support Brad Larson 2021-03-04 3:41 ` Brad Larson 2021-03-04 8:03 ` Serge Semin 2021-03-04 8:03 ` Serge Semin 2021-03-29 1:07 ` Brad Larson 2021-03-29 1:07 ` Brad Larson 2021-08-23 0:54 ` Brad Larson 2021-08-23 0:54 ` Brad Larson 2021-03-04 8:51 ` Linus Walleij 2021-03-04 8:51 ` Linus Walleij 2021-03-29 0:54 ` Brad Larson 2021-03-29 0:54 ` Brad Larson 2021-03-04 9:06 ` Arnd Bergmann 2021-03-04 9:06 ` Arnd Bergmann 2021-03-04 20:47 ` Rob Herring 2021-03-04 20:47 ` Rob Herring 2021-03-05 11:22 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2021-03-05 11:22 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2021-03-04 3:41 ` [PATCH 8/8] MAINTAINERS: Add entry for PENSANDO Brad Larson 2021-03-04 3:41 ` Brad Larson
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=CAK9rFnxgdyxM11n6PaqG_phuDMXnHYWSm+Xaqg89dMYCF3CN8g@mail.gmail.com \ --to=brad@pensando.io \ --cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \ --cc=andy.shevchenko@gmail.com \ --cc=arnd@arndb.de \ --cc=bgolaszewski@baylibre.com \ --cc=broonie@kernel.org \ --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=fancer.lancer@gmail.com \ --cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-spi@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=olof@lixom.net \ --cc=ulf.hansson@linaro.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: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.