All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: <Codrin.Ciubotariu@microchip.com>
To: <wsa@kernel.org>
Cc: <linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org>, <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	<Ludovic.Desroches@microchip.com>, <Nicolas.Ferre@microchip.com>,
	<alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>, <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
	<kamel.bouhara@bootlin.com>
Subject: Re: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/4] i2c: core: treat EPROBE_DEFER when acquiring SCL/SDA GPIOs
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 15:33:41 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <15a449fa-d649-846a-e6f2-1540f9581846@microchip.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200802170500.GB10193@kunai>

On 02.08.2020 20:05, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 05:19:03PM +0300, Codrin Ciubotariu wrote:
>> Even if I2C bus GPIO recovery is optional, devm_gpiod_get() can return
>> -EPROBE_DEFER, so we should at least treat that. This ends up with
>> i2c_register_adapter() to be able to return -EPROBE_DEFER.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Codrin Ciubotariu <codrin.ciubotariu@microchip.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++------
>>   1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c b/drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c
>> index 4ee29fec4e93..f8d9f2048ca8 100644
>> --- a/drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c
>> +++ b/drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c
>> @@ -368,15 +368,16 @@ static int i2c_gpio_init_recovery(struct i2c_adapter *adap)
>>   	return i2c_gpio_init_generic_recovery(adap);
>>   }
>>   
>> -static void i2c_init_recovery(struct i2c_adapter *adap)
>> +static int i2c_init_recovery(struct i2c_adapter *adap)
>>   {
>>   	struct i2c_bus_recovery_info *bri = adap->bus_recovery_info;
>>   	char *err_str;
>>   
>>   	if (!bri)
>> -		return;
>> +		return 0;
>>   
>> -	i2c_gpio_init_recovery(adap);
>> +	if (i2c_gpio_init_recovery(adap) == -EPROBE_DEFER)
>> +		return -EPROBE_DEFER;
>>   
>>   	if (!bri->recover_bus) {
>>   		err_str = "no recover_bus() found";
>> @@ -392,7 +393,7 @@ static void i2c_init_recovery(struct i2c_adapter *adap)
>>   			if (gpiod_get_direction(bri->sda_gpiod) == 0)
>>   				bri->set_sda = set_sda_gpio_value;
>>   		}
>> -		return;
>> +		return 0;
> 
> This is correct but I think the code flow is/was confusing. Can you drop
> this 'return' and use 'else if' for the next code block? I think this is
> more readable.

Ok, it makes sense. Should I make a separate patch for this only?
One more question, should we keep:
if (!bri->set_sda && !bri->get_sda) {
	err_str = "either get_sda() or set_sda() needed";
	goto err;
}
?
Without {get/set}_sda we won't be able to generate stop commands and 
possibly check if the bus is free, but we can still generate the SCL 
clock pulses.

> 
>>   	}
>>   
>>   	if (bri->recover_bus == i2c_generic_scl_recovery) {
>> @@ -407,10 +408,12 @@ static void i2c_init_recovery(struct i2c_adapter *adap)
>>   		}
>>   	}
>>   
>> -	return;
>> +	return 0;
>>    err:
>>   	dev_err(&adap->dev, "Not using recovery: %s\n", err_str);
>>   	adap->bus_recovery_info = NULL;
>> +
>> +	return 0;
> 
> 'return -EINVAL;' I'd suggest.

OK

> 
>>   }
>>   
>>   static int i2c_smbus_host_notify_to_irq(const struct i2c_client *client)
>> @@ -1476,7 +1479,9 @@ static int i2c_register_adapter(struct i2c_adapter *adap)
>>   			 "Failed to create compatibility class link\n");
>>   #endif
>>   
>> -	i2c_init_recovery(adap);
>> +	res = i2c_init_recovery(adap);
>> +	if (res == -EPROBE_DEFER)
>> +		goto out_link;
> 
> Please move 'i2c_init_recovery' above the class-link creation. It
> shouldn't make a difference but we can skip the extra label and the
> ifdeffery.

Ok. Perhaps I should also move the debug print with the registered 
adapter after calling i2c_init_recovery().

> 
>>   
>>   	/* create pre-declared device nodes */
>>   	of_i2c_register_devices(adap);
>> @@ -1493,6 +1498,11 @@ static int i2c_register_adapter(struct i2c_adapter *adap)
>>   
>>   	return 0;
>>   
>> +out_link:
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_I2C_COMPAT
>> +	class_compat_remove_link(i2c_adapter_compat_class, &adap->dev,
>> +				 adap->dev.parent);
>> +#endif
>>   out_reg:
>>   	init_completion(&adap->dev_released);
>>   	device_unregister(&adap->dev);
>> -- 
>> 2.25.1
>>

Do you want me to integrate this patch in the previous one?

Best regards,
Codrin

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: <Codrin.Ciubotariu@microchip.com>
To: <wsa@kernel.org>
Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com,
	kamel.bouhara@bootlin.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Ludovic.Desroches@microchip.com, robh+dt@kernel.org,
	linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux@armlinux.org.uk,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/4] i2c: core: treat EPROBE_DEFER when acquiring SCL/SDA GPIOs
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 15:33:41 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <15a449fa-d649-846a-e6f2-1540f9581846@microchip.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200802170500.GB10193@kunai>

On 02.08.2020 20:05, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 05:19:03PM +0300, Codrin Ciubotariu wrote:
>> Even if I2C bus GPIO recovery is optional, devm_gpiod_get() can return
>> -EPROBE_DEFER, so we should at least treat that. This ends up with
>> i2c_register_adapter() to be able to return -EPROBE_DEFER.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Codrin Ciubotariu <codrin.ciubotariu@microchip.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++------
>>   1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c b/drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c
>> index 4ee29fec4e93..f8d9f2048ca8 100644
>> --- a/drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c
>> +++ b/drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c
>> @@ -368,15 +368,16 @@ static int i2c_gpio_init_recovery(struct i2c_adapter *adap)
>>   	return i2c_gpio_init_generic_recovery(adap);
>>   }
>>   
>> -static void i2c_init_recovery(struct i2c_adapter *adap)
>> +static int i2c_init_recovery(struct i2c_adapter *adap)
>>   {
>>   	struct i2c_bus_recovery_info *bri = adap->bus_recovery_info;
>>   	char *err_str;
>>   
>>   	if (!bri)
>> -		return;
>> +		return 0;
>>   
>> -	i2c_gpio_init_recovery(adap);
>> +	if (i2c_gpio_init_recovery(adap) == -EPROBE_DEFER)
>> +		return -EPROBE_DEFER;
>>   
>>   	if (!bri->recover_bus) {
>>   		err_str = "no recover_bus() found";
>> @@ -392,7 +393,7 @@ static void i2c_init_recovery(struct i2c_adapter *adap)
>>   			if (gpiod_get_direction(bri->sda_gpiod) == 0)
>>   				bri->set_sda = set_sda_gpio_value;
>>   		}
>> -		return;
>> +		return 0;
> 
> This is correct but I think the code flow is/was confusing. Can you drop
> this 'return' and use 'else if' for the next code block? I think this is
> more readable.

Ok, it makes sense. Should I make a separate patch for this only?
One more question, should we keep:
if (!bri->set_sda && !bri->get_sda) {
	err_str = "either get_sda() or set_sda() needed";
	goto err;
}
?
Without {get/set}_sda we won't be able to generate stop commands and 
possibly check if the bus is free, but we can still generate the SCL 
clock pulses.

> 
>>   	}
>>   
>>   	if (bri->recover_bus == i2c_generic_scl_recovery) {
>> @@ -407,10 +408,12 @@ static void i2c_init_recovery(struct i2c_adapter *adap)
>>   		}
>>   	}
>>   
>> -	return;
>> +	return 0;
>>    err:
>>   	dev_err(&adap->dev, "Not using recovery: %s\n", err_str);
>>   	adap->bus_recovery_info = NULL;
>> +
>> +	return 0;
> 
> 'return -EINVAL;' I'd suggest.

OK

> 
>>   }
>>   
>>   static int i2c_smbus_host_notify_to_irq(const struct i2c_client *client)
>> @@ -1476,7 +1479,9 @@ static int i2c_register_adapter(struct i2c_adapter *adap)
>>   			 "Failed to create compatibility class link\n");
>>   #endif
>>   
>> -	i2c_init_recovery(adap);
>> +	res = i2c_init_recovery(adap);
>> +	if (res == -EPROBE_DEFER)
>> +		goto out_link;
> 
> Please move 'i2c_init_recovery' above the class-link creation. It
> shouldn't make a difference but we can skip the extra label and the
> ifdeffery.

Ok. Perhaps I should also move the debug print with the registered 
adapter after calling i2c_init_recovery().

> 
>>   
>>   	/* create pre-declared device nodes */
>>   	of_i2c_register_devices(adap);
>> @@ -1493,6 +1498,11 @@ static int i2c_register_adapter(struct i2c_adapter *adap)
>>   
>>   	return 0;
>>   
>> +out_link:
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_I2C_COMPAT
>> +	class_compat_remove_link(i2c_adapter_compat_class, &adap->dev,
>> +				 adap->dev.parent);
>> +#endif
>>   out_reg:
>>   	init_completion(&adap->dev_released);
>>   	device_unregister(&adap->dev);
>> -- 
>> 2.25.1
>>

Do you want me to integrate this patch in the previous one?

Best regards,
Codrin

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2020-08-03 15:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-06-19 14:19 [RFC PATCH 0/4] i2c: core: add generic GPIO bus recovery Codrin Ciubotariu
2020-06-19 14:19 ` Codrin Ciubotariu
2020-06-19 14:19 ` [RFC PATCH 1/4] dt-binding: i2c: add generic properties for " Codrin Ciubotariu
2020-06-19 14:19   ` Codrin Ciubotariu
2020-07-05 21:19   ` Wolfram Sang
2020-07-05 21:19     ` Wolfram Sang
2020-07-24 19:39     ` Wolfram Sang
2020-07-24 19:39       ` Wolfram Sang
2020-07-24 20:52       ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2020-07-24 20:52         ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2020-07-27 10:44         ` Codrin.Ciubotariu
2020-07-27 10:44           ` Codrin.Ciubotariu
2020-07-27 10:50           ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2020-07-27 10:50             ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2020-07-30  9:00             ` Codrin.Ciubotariu
2020-07-30  9:00               ` Codrin.Ciubotariu
2020-08-03 14:16               ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2020-08-03 14:16                 ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2020-08-03 16:42                 ` Codrin.Ciubotariu
2020-08-03 16:42                   ` Codrin.Ciubotariu
2020-07-15 19:21   ` Rob Herring
2020-07-15 19:21     ` Rob Herring
2020-06-19 14:19 ` [RFC PATCH 2/4] i2c: core: add generic I2C GPIO recovery Codrin Ciubotariu
2020-06-19 14:19   ` Codrin Ciubotariu
2020-08-02 16:54   ` Wolfram Sang
2020-08-02 16:54     ` Wolfram Sang
2020-08-03 13:27     ` Codrin.Ciubotariu
2020-08-03 13:27       ` Codrin.Ciubotariu
2020-08-03 16:49       ` wsa
2020-08-03 16:49         ` wsa
2020-06-19 14:19 ` [RFC PATCH 3/4] i2c: core: treat EPROBE_DEFER when acquiring SCL/SDA GPIOs Codrin Ciubotariu
2020-06-19 14:19   ` Codrin Ciubotariu
2020-08-02 17:05   ` Wolfram Sang
2020-08-02 17:05     ` Wolfram Sang
2020-08-03 15:33     ` Codrin.Ciubotariu [this message]
2020-08-03 15:33       ` Codrin.Ciubotariu
2020-08-03 16:59       ` wsa
2020-08-03 16:59         ` wsa
2020-06-19 14:19 ` [RFC PATCH 4/4] i2c: at91: Move to generic GPIO bus recovery Codrin Ciubotariu
2020-06-19 14:19   ` Codrin Ciubotariu
2020-08-02 17:08   ` Wolfram Sang
2020-08-02 17:08     ` Wolfram Sang
2020-08-03 15:42     ` Codrin.Ciubotariu
2020-08-03 15:42       ` Codrin.Ciubotariu
2020-08-03 16:59       ` wsa
2020-08-03 16:59         ` wsa
2020-08-26  6:14       ` Wolfram Sang
2020-08-26  6:14         ` Wolfram Sang
2020-09-04  8:55         ` Codrin.Ciubotariu
2020-09-04  8:55           ` Codrin.Ciubotariu
2020-09-04  9:20           ` Wolfram Sang
2020-09-04  9:20             ` Wolfram Sang
2020-07-05 21:09 ` [RFC PATCH 0/4] i2c: core: add " Wolfram Sang
2020-07-05 21:09   ` Wolfram Sang

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=15a449fa-d649-846a-e6f2-1540f9581846@microchip.com \
    --to=codrin.ciubotariu@microchip.com \
    --cc=Ludovic.Desroches@microchip.com \
    --cc=Nicolas.Ferre@microchip.com \
    --cc=alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kamel.bouhara@bootlin.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
    --cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=wsa@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 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.