From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
To: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>
Cc: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org,
Luca Ceresoli <luca@lucaceresoli.net>,
Kieran Bingham <kieran@ksquared.org.uk>,
Jacopo Mondi <jacopo@jmondi.org>,
Vladimir Zapolskiy <vz@mleia.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/5] i2c: core: refactor scanning for a client
Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2020 18:45:22 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200101164522.GA6226@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191231161400.1688-2-wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>
Hi Wolfram,
Thank you for the patch.
On Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 05:13:56PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> There is a pattern to check for existence of a client which is copied in
> i2c_detect_address() and i2c_new_scanned_device():
>
> 1) check if address is valid
> 2) check if address is already registered
> 3) send a message and check the reponse
>
> Because this pattern will be needed a third time soon, refactor it into
> its own function.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>
> ---
> drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c | 57 ++++++++++++++++---------------------
> 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c b/drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c
> index a1eb28a3cc54..20a726dc78db 100644
> --- a/drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c
> +++ b/drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c
> @@ -2108,29 +2108,39 @@ static int i2c_default_probe(struct i2c_adapter *adap, unsigned short addr)
> return err >= 0;
> }
>
> -static int i2c_detect_address(struct i2c_client *temp_client,
> - struct i2c_driver *driver)
> +static int i2c_scan_for_client(struct i2c_adapter *adap, unsigned short addr,
> + int (*probe)(struct i2c_adapter *adap, unsigned short addr))
> {
> - struct i2c_board_info info;
> - struct i2c_adapter *adapter = temp_client->adapter;
> - int addr = temp_client->addr;
> int err;
>
> /* Make sure the address is valid */
> err = i2c_check_7bit_addr_validity_strict(addr);
> - if (err) {
> - dev_warn(&adapter->dev, "Invalid probe address 0x%02x\n",
> - addr);
> + if (WARN(err, "Invalid probe address 0x%02x\n", addr))
Does this deserve a full backtrace ? If so could you mention it in the
commit message ?
With this addressed,
Reviewed-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
> return err;
> - }
>
> /* Skip if already in use (7 bit, no need to encode flags) */
> - if (i2c_check_addr_busy(adapter, addr))
> - return 0;
> + if (i2c_check_addr_busy(adap, addr))
> + return -EBUSY;
>
> /* Make sure there is something at this address */
> - if (!i2c_default_probe(adapter, addr))
> - return 0;
> + if (!probe(adap, addr))
> + return -ENODEV;
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int i2c_detect_address(struct i2c_client *temp_client,
> + struct i2c_driver *driver)
> +{
> + struct i2c_board_info info;
> + struct i2c_adapter *adapter = temp_client->adapter;
> + int addr = temp_client->addr;
> + int err;
> +
> + /* Only report broken addresses, busy addresses are no error */
> + err = i2c_scan_for_client(adapter, addr, i2c_default_probe);
> + if (err < 0)
> + return err == -EINVAL ? -EINVAL : 0;
>
> /* Finally call the custom detection function */
> memset(&info, 0, sizeof(struct i2c_board_info));
> @@ -2232,26 +2242,9 @@ i2c_new_scanned_device(struct i2c_adapter *adap,
> if (!probe)
> probe = i2c_default_probe;
>
> - for (i = 0; addr_list[i] != I2C_CLIENT_END; i++) {
> - /* Check address validity */
> - if (i2c_check_7bit_addr_validity_strict(addr_list[i]) < 0) {
> - dev_warn(&adap->dev, "Invalid 7-bit address 0x%02x\n",
> - addr_list[i]);
> - continue;
> - }
> -
> - /* Check address availability (7 bit, no need to encode flags) */
> - if (i2c_check_addr_busy(adap, addr_list[i])) {
> - dev_dbg(&adap->dev,
> - "Address 0x%02x already in use, not probing\n",
> - addr_list[i]);
> - continue;
> - }
> -
> - /* Test address responsiveness */
> - if (probe(adap, addr_list[i]))
> + for (i = 0; addr_list[i] != I2C_CLIENT_END; i++)
> + if (i2c_scan_for_client(adap, addr_list[i], probe) == 0)
> break;
> - }
>
> if (addr_list[i] == I2C_CLIENT_END) {
> dev_dbg(&adap->dev, "Probing failed, no device found\n");
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-01 16:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-31 16:13 [RFC PATCH 0/5] i2c: implement mechanism to retrieve an alias device Wolfram Sang
2019-12-31 16:13 ` [RFC PATCH 1/5] i2c: core: refactor scanning for a client Wolfram Sang
2020-01-01 16:45 ` Laurent Pinchart [this message]
2020-01-07 9:26 ` Kieran Bingham
2020-01-07 9:53 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2020-01-07 9:58 ` Kieran Bingham
2020-01-07 10:25 ` Wolfram Sang
2020-01-07 10:36 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2020-01-07 11:23 ` Wolfram Sang
2020-01-07 15:03 ` Luca Ceresoli
2020-01-07 16:45 ` Wolfram Sang
2020-01-07 16:52 ` Kieran Bingham
2019-12-31 16:13 ` [RFC PATCH 2/5] i2c: core: add new variant to check " Wolfram Sang
2020-01-01 16:49 ` Laurent Pinchart
2020-01-07 9:42 ` Kieran Bingham
2019-12-31 16:13 ` [RFC PATCH 3/5] i2c: core: add function to request an alias Wolfram Sang
2020-01-01 16:55 ` Laurent Pinchart
2020-01-02 18:58 ` Luca Ceresoli
2020-01-02 21:13 ` Wolfram Sang
2020-01-02 22:27 ` Luca Ceresoli
2020-01-03 0:10 ` Laurent Pinchart
2020-01-07 15:03 ` Luca Ceresoli
2020-01-07 17:13 ` Laurent Pinchart
2020-01-08 13:27 ` Wolfram Sang
2020-01-08 13:31 ` Laurent Pinchart
2020-01-08 13:38 ` Wolfram Sang
2020-01-08 13:22 ` Wolfram Sang
2020-01-08 13:19 ` Wolfram Sang
2020-01-08 13:29 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2020-01-08 13:34 ` Laurent Pinchart
2020-01-02 21:03 ` Wolfram Sang
2020-01-21 9:05 ` Peter Rosin
2020-01-07 9:40 ` Kieran Bingham
2020-01-07 17:11 ` Laurent Pinchart
2020-01-07 17:14 ` Kieran Bingham
2020-01-08 13:35 ` Wolfram Sang
2020-01-08 13:36 ` Laurent Pinchart
2019-12-31 16:13 ` [RFC PATCH 4/5] i2c: core: add simple caching to the 'alias' scanning Wolfram Sang
2020-01-07 9:59 ` Kieran Bingham
2020-01-21 9:22 ` Peter Rosin
2019-12-31 16:14 ` [RFC PATCH 5/5] simple test case for the I2C alias functionality Wolfram Sang
2019-12-31 16:27 ` [RFC PATCH 0/5] i2c: implement mechanism to retrieve an alias device 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=20200101164522.GA6226@pendragon.ideasonboard.com \
--to=laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com \
--cc=jacopo@jmondi.org \
--cc=kieran@ksquared.org.uk \
--cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luca@lucaceresoli.net \
--cc=vz@mleia.com \
--cc=wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com \
/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).