All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Rosin <peda@axentia.se>
To: Crestez Dan Leonard <leonard.crestez@intel.com>,
	Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>, <linux-iio@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@gmx.de>,
	Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
	Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@pmeerw.net>,
	Daniel Baluta <daniel.baluta@intel.com>,
	<linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org>, Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>,
	<devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@arm.com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio: inv_mpu6050: Add support for auxiliary I2C master
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2016 12:09:13 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <cfbef50a-3caa-3372-d911-14dd27c98e27@axentia.se> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <14f3be16-2912-cbed-ab89-08b1c22d827c@axentia.se>

On 2016-04-29 11:29, Peter Rosin wrote:

> On 2016-04-28 12:39, Crestez Dan Leonard wrote:
>> On 04/27/2016 11:39 AM, Peter Rosin wrote:
>>> On 2016-04-23 23:32, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>>>> On 20/04/16 18:17, Crestez Dan Leonard wrote:
>>>>> The MPU has an auxiliary I2C bus for connecting external
>>>>> sensors. This bus has two operating modes:
>>>>> * pass-through, which connects the primary and auxiliary busses
>>>>> together. This is already supported via an i2c mux.
>>>>> * I2C master mode, where the mpu60x0 acts as a master to any external
>>>>> connected sensors. This is implemented by this patch.
>>>>>
>>>>> This I2C master mode also works when the MPU itself is connected via
>>>>> SPI.
>>>>>
>>>>> I2C master supports up to 5 slaves. Slaves 0-3 have a common operating
>>>>> mode while slave 4 is different. This patch implements an i2c adapter
>>>>> using slave 4 because it has a cleaner interface and it has an
>>>>> interrupt that signals when data from slave to master arrived.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Crestez Dan Leonard <leonard.crestez@intel.com>
>>>> This one needs acks from:
>>>>
>>>> Device tree maintainer (odd binding ;)
>>>> Peter Rosin (odd binding interacting with the mux support)
>>>> Wolfram (it has a whole i2c master driver in here).
>>>>
>>>> (just thought I'd list these for the avoidance of doubt).
>>> I spot some overlap with the questions in "[RFC] i2c: device-tree:
>>> Handling child nodes which are not i2c devices"
>>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-i2c&m=146073452819116&w=2
>>>
>>> And I think I agree with Stephen Warren that an intermediate placeholder
>>> node would make sense. I.e.
>>>
>>>     mpu6050@68 {
>>>         compatible = "...";
>>>         reg = <0x68>;
>>>         ...
>>>         i2c-aux-mux {
>>>             i2c@0 {
>>>                 #address-cells = <1>;
>>>                 #size-cells = <0>;
>>>                 reg = <0>;
>>>
>>>                 foo@44 {
>>>                     compatible = "bar";
>>>                     reg = <0x44>;
>>>                     ...
>>>                 }
>>>             }
>>>         }
>>>     }
>>>
>>> Or
>>>
>>>     mpu6050@68 {
>>>         compatible = "...";
>>>         reg = <0x68>;
>>>         ...
>>>         i2c-aux-master {
>>>             #address-cells = <1>;
>>>             #size-cells = <0>;
>>>
>>>             gazonk@44 {
>>>                 compatible = "baz";
>>>                 reg = <0x44>;
>>>                 ...
>>>             }
>>>         }
>>>     }
>>>
>>> depending on if you want an aux-mux or an aux-master.
>>>
>>> But I don't know if that intermediate i2c-aux-mux node causes any
>>> problems?
>> It's not clear how that would be implemented. It seems to me that right
>> now i2c_add_mux_adapter assumes that the parent device is a dedicated
>> mux device and all it's children are mux branches. Would this require
>> introducing a new "struct device" for the i2c-aux-master node?
>>
>> It might make sense to make the automatic processing of the parents
>> node's of_node optional and let the caller assign the of_node describing
>> the attached devices.
>>
>> I think the most natural solution would be to require child nodes named
>> i2c-aux-mux and i2c-aux-master to describe aux devices. For backwards
>> compatibility it would be easiest to go with i2c@0/i2c@1 (identified by
>> reg=0/1).
>>
>> But I don't know much about devicetree and I'd rather accept an external
>> suggestion.
>>
> I was thinking that with the new i2c_mux_core in place, it should be pretty simple
> to add a hook to point to another node and only use dev->of_node as a default
> value for where to look for the mux child adapters?
>
Or maybe always look for an intermediate "i2c-mux" node and look there if it exists? Something like this (totally untested) on top of the i2c-mux-core cleanup already in next (should be easy to adapt to 4.5 if you want that). Cheers, Peter

diff --git a/drivers/i2c/i2c-mux.c b/drivers/i2c/i2c-mux.c
index 25e9336b0e6e..ff1374f5b4f6 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/i2c-mux.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/i2c-mux.c
@@ -179,10 +179,15 @@ int i2c_mux_add_adapter(struct i2c_mux_core *muxc,
 	 * nothing if !CONFIG_OF.
 	 */
 	if (muxc->dev->of_node) {
+		struct device_node *mux;
 		struct device_node *child;
 		u32 reg;
 
-		for_each_child_of_node(muxc->dev->of_node, child) {
+		mux = of_get_child_by_name(muxc->dev->of_node, "i2c-mux");
+		if (!mux)
+			mux = muxc->dev->of_node;
+
+		for_each_child_of_node(mux, child) {
 			ret = of_property_read_u32(child, "reg", &reg);
 			if (ret)
 				continue;

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Peter Rosin <peda@axentia.se>
To: Crestez Dan Leonard <leonard.crestez@intel.com>,
	Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>,
	linux-iio@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@gmx.de>,
	Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
	Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@pmeerw.net>,
	Daniel Baluta <daniel.baluta@intel.com>,
	linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@arm.com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio: inv_mpu6050: Add support for auxiliary I2C master
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2016 12:09:13 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <cfbef50a-3caa-3372-d911-14dd27c98e27@axentia.se> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <14f3be16-2912-cbed-ab89-08b1c22d827c@axentia.se>

On 2016-04-29 11:29, Peter Rosin wrote:

> On 2016-04-28 12:39, Crestez Dan Leonard wrote:
>> On 04/27/2016 11:39 AM, Peter Rosin wrote:
>>> On 2016-04-23 23:32, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>>>> On 20/04/16 18:17, Crestez Dan Leonard wrote:
>>>>> The MPU has an auxiliary I2C bus for connecting external
>>>>> sensors. This bus has two operating modes:
>>>>> * pass-through, which connects the primary and auxiliary busses
>>>>> together. This is already supported via an i2c mux.
>>>>> * I2C master mode, where the mpu60x0 acts as a master to any external
>>>>> connected sensors. This is implemented by this patch.
>>>>>
>>>>> This I2C master mode also works when the MPU itself is connected via
>>>>> SPI.
>>>>>
>>>>> I2C master supports up to 5 slaves. Slaves 0-3 have a common operating
>>>>> mode while slave 4 is different. This patch implements an i2c adapter
>>>>> using slave 4 because it has a cleaner interface and it has an
>>>>> interrupt that signals when data from slave to master arrived.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Crestez Dan Leonard <leonard.crestez@intel.com>
>>>> This one needs acks from:
>>>>
>>>> Device tree maintainer (odd binding ;)
>>>> Peter Rosin (odd binding interacting with the mux support)
>>>> Wolfram (it has a whole i2c master driver in here).
>>>>
>>>> (just thought I'd list these for the avoidance of doubt).
>>> I spot some overlap with the questions in "[RFC] i2c: device-tree:
>>> Handling child nodes which are not i2c devices"
>>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-i2c&m=146073452819116&w=2
>>>
>>> And I think I agree with Stephen Warren that an intermediate placeholder
>>> node would make sense. I.e.
>>>
>>>     mpu6050@68 {
>>>         compatible = "...";
>>>         reg = <0x68>;
>>>         ...
>>>         i2c-aux-mux {
>>>             i2c@0 {
>>>                 #address-cells = <1>;
>>>                 #size-cells = <0>;
>>>                 reg = <0>;
>>>
>>>                 foo@44 {
>>>                     compatible = "bar";
>>>                     reg = <0x44>;
>>>                     ...
>>>                 }
>>>             }
>>>         }
>>>     }
>>>
>>> Or
>>>
>>>     mpu6050@68 {
>>>         compatible = "...";
>>>         reg = <0x68>;
>>>         ...
>>>         i2c-aux-master {
>>>             #address-cells = <1>;
>>>             #size-cells = <0>;
>>>
>>>             gazonk@44 {
>>>                 compatible = "baz";
>>>                 reg = <0x44>;
>>>                 ...
>>>             }
>>>         }
>>>     }
>>>
>>> depending on if you want an aux-mux or an aux-master.
>>>
>>> But I don't know if that intermediate i2c-aux-mux node causes any
>>> problems?
>> It's not clear how that would be implemented. It seems to me that right
>> now i2c_add_mux_adapter assumes that the parent device is a dedicated
>> mux device and all it's children are mux branches. Would this require
>> introducing a new "struct device" for the i2c-aux-master node?
>>
>> It might make sense to make the automatic processing of the parents
>> node's of_node optional and let the caller assign the of_node describing
>> the attached devices.
>>
>> I think the most natural solution would be to require child nodes named
>> i2c-aux-mux and i2c-aux-master to describe aux devices. For backwards
>> compatibility it would be easiest to go with i2c@0/i2c@1 (identified by
>> reg=0/1).
>>
>> But I don't know much about devicetree and I'd rather accept an external
>> suggestion.
>>
> I was thinking that with the new i2c_mux_core in place, it should be pretty simple
> to add a hook to point to another node and only use dev->of_node as a default
> value for where to look for the mux child adapters?
>
Or maybe always look for an intermediate "i2c-mux" node and look there if it exists? Something like this (totally untested) on top of the i2c-mux-core cleanup already in next (should be easy to adapt to 4.5 if you want that). Cheers, Peter

diff --git a/drivers/i2c/i2c-mux.c b/drivers/i2c/i2c-mux.c
index 25e9336b0e6e..ff1374f5b4f6 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/i2c-mux.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/i2c-mux.c
@@ -179,10 +179,15 @@ int i2c_mux_add_adapter(struct i2c_mux_core *muxc,
 	 * nothing if !CONFIG_OF.
 	 */
 	if (muxc->dev->of_node) {
+		struct device_node *mux;
 		struct device_node *child;
 		u32 reg;
 
-		for_each_child_of_node(muxc->dev->of_node, child) {
+		mux = of_get_child_by_name(muxc->dev->of_node, "i2c-mux");
+		if (!mux)
+			mux = muxc->dev->of_node;
+
+		for_each_child_of_node(mux, child) {
 			ret = of_property_read_u32(child, "reg", &reg);
 			if (ret)
 				continue;

  reply	other threads:[~2016-04-29 10:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-04-20 17:17 [PATCH] iio: inv_mpu6050: Add support for auxiliary I2C master Crestez Dan Leonard
2016-04-20 18:17 ` kbuild test robot
2016-04-20 18:17   ` kbuild test robot
2016-04-21 10:02   ` Crestez Dan Leonard
2016-04-23 21:32 ` Jonathan Cameron
2016-04-27  8:39   ` Peter Rosin
2016-04-27  8:39     ` Peter Rosin
2016-04-28 10:39     ` Crestez Dan Leonard
2016-04-29  9:29       ` Peter Rosin
2016-04-29  9:29         ` Peter Rosin
2016-04-29 10:09         ` Peter Rosin [this message]
2016-04-29 10:09           ` Peter Rosin
2016-04-20 20:31 Peter Rosin
2016-04-20 20:31 ` Peter Rosin
2016-04-21 12:01 ` Crestez Dan Leonard
2016-04-21 13:56 Peter Rosin
2016-04-21 13:56 ` Peter Rosin
2016-04-21 13:56 ` Peter Rosin
2016-04-22 10:15 ` Crestez Dan Leonard
2016-04-22 11:01 Peter Rosin

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=cfbef50a-3caa-3372-d911-14dd27c98e27@axentia.se \
    --to=peda@axentia.se \
    --cc=daniel.baluta@intel.com \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=galak@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk \
    --cc=jic23@kernel.org \
    --cc=knaack.h@gmx.de \
    --cc=lars@metafoo.de \
    --cc=leonard.crestez@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=pawel.moll@arm.com \
    --cc=pmeerw@pmeerw.net \
    --cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=wsa@the-dreams.de \
    /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.