From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pankaj Dubey Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 1/8] soc: samsung: add exynos chipid driver support Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2016 09:36:59 +0530 Message-ID: References: <1481375323-29724-1-git-send-email-pankaj.dubey@samsung.com> <1481375323-29724-2-git-send-email-pankaj.dubey@samsung.com> <20161216173703.GA3746@kozik-lap> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Return-path: Received: from mail-lf0-f65.google.com ([209.85.215.65]:36282 "EHLO mail-lf0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752223AbcLQEHW (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Dec 2016 23:07:22 -0500 Received: by mail-lf0-f65.google.com with SMTP id o20so2805251lfg.3 for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2016 20:07:21 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20161216173703.GA3746@kozik-lap> Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org To: Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: linux-samsung-soc , Arnd Bergmann , geert+renesas@glider.be, Linus Walleij , Javier Martinez Canillas , Kukjin Kim , "thomas.ab@samsung.com" , Grant Likely , Rob Herring , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Marek Szyprowski Hi Krzysztof, On 16 December 2016 at 23:07, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 06:38:36PM +0530, Pankaj Dubey wrote: >> Exynos SoCs have Chipid, for identification of product IDs and SoC revisions. >> This patch intends to provide initialization code for all these functionalities, >> at the same time it provides some sysfs entries for accessing these information >> to user-space. >> >> This driver uses existing binding for exynos-chipid. >> >> CC: Grant Likely >> CC: Rob Herring >> CC: Linus Walleij >> Signed-off-by: Pankaj Dubey >> [m.szyprowski: for suggestion and code snippet of product_id_to_soc_id] >> Signed-off-by: Marek Szyprowski >> --- >> drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig | 5 ++ >> drivers/soc/samsung/Makefile | 1 + >> drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-chipid.c | 116 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 3 files changed, 122 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-chipid.c >> >> diff --git a/drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig b/drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig >> index 2455339..f9ab858 100644 >> --- a/drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig >> +++ b/drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig >> @@ -14,4 +14,9 @@ config EXYNOS_PM_DOMAINS >> bool "Exynos PM domains" if COMPILE_TEST >> depends on PM_GENERIC_DOMAINS || COMPILE_TEST >> >> +config EXYNOS_CHIPID >> + bool "Exynos Chipid controller driver" if COMPILE_TEST >> + depends on (ARM && ARCH_EXYNOS) || ((ARM || ARM64) && COMPILE_TEST) > > 1. Why this can be compile tested only on ARM architectures? Well I just used dependency same as EXYNOS_PMU, but I can see it will be enabled for compile test on ARM64 isn't it? > 2. Don't you need also SOC_BUS? CHIPID needs SoC_BUS and for the same reason it is selecting SOC_BUS in the next line. If we mark it as a dependency (under depends on), even then we need to select this either under same EXYNOS_CHIPID config or ARCH_EXYNOS config. > >> + select SOC_BUS >> + >> endif >> diff --git a/drivers/soc/samsung/Makefile b/drivers/soc/samsung/Makefile >> index 3619f2e..2a8a85e 100644 >> --- a/drivers/soc/samsung/Makefile >> +++ b/drivers/soc/samsung/Makefile >> @@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ >> obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS_PMU) += exynos-pmu.o exynos3250-pmu.o exynos4-pmu.o \ >> exynos5250-pmu.o exynos5420-pmu.o >> obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS_PM_DOMAINS) += pm_domains.o >> +obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS_CHIPID) += exynos-chipid.o > > Please put it before EXYNOS_PMU, keeping this sorted alphabetical helps > avoiding conflicts of continuous edits. > >> diff --git a/drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-chipid.c b/drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-chipid.c >> new file mode 100644 >> index 0000000..cf0128b >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-chipid.c >> @@ -0,0 +1,116 @@ >> +/* >> + * Copyright (c) 2016 Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. >> + * http://www.samsung.com/ >> + * >> + * EXYNOS - CHIP ID support >> + * Author: Pankaj Dubey >> + * >> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify >> + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as >> + * published by the Free Software Foundation. >> + */ >> + >> +#include >> +#include >> +#include >> +#include >> +#include >> +#include >> +#include >> + >> +#define EXYNOS_SUBREV_MASK (0xF << 4) >> +#define EXYNOS_MAINREV_MASK (0xF << 0) >> +#define EXYNOS_REV_MASK (EXYNOS_SUBREV_MASK | EXYNOS_MAINREV_MASK) >> + >> +static const struct exynos_soc_id { >> + const char *name; >> + unsigned int id; >> + unsigned int mask; >> +} soc_ids[] = { >> + { "EXYNOS3250", 0xE3472000, 0xFFFFF000 }, >> + { "EXYNOS4210", 0x43200000, 0xFFFE0000 }, >> + { "EXYNOS4212", 0x43220000, 0xFFFE0000 }, >> + { "EXYNOS4412", 0xE4412000, 0xFFFE0000 }, >> + { "EXYNOS5250", 0x43520000, 0xFFFFF000 }, >> + { "EXYNOS5260", 0xE5260000, 0xFFFFF000 }, >> + { "EXYNOS5410", 0xE5410000, 0xFFFFF000 }, >> + { "EXYNOS5420", 0xE5420000, 0xFFFFF000 }, >> + { "EXYNOS5440", 0xE5440000, 0xFFFFF000 }, >> + { "EXYNOS5800", 0xE5422000, 0xFFFFF000 }, >> + { "EXYNOS7420", 0xE7420000, 0xFFFFF000 }, >> + { "EXYNOS5433", 0xE5433000, 0xFFFFF000 }, >> +}; >> + >> +static const char * __init product_id_to_soc_id(unsigned int product_id) >> +{ >> + int i; >> + >> + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(soc_ids); i++) >> + if ((product_id & soc_ids[i].mask) == soc_ids[i].id) >> + return soc_ids[i].name; >> + return "UNKNOWN"; >> +} >> + >> +static const struct of_device_id of_exynos_chipid_ids[] = { >> + { >> + .compatible = "samsung,exynos4210-chipid", >> + }, >> + {}, >> +}; >> + >> +/** >> + * exynos_chipid_early_init: Early chipid initialization >> + */ > > This comment is meaningless, it duplicates the name of function. Ok, will remove this in v9. > >> +int __init exynos_chipid_early_init(void) >> +{ >> + struct soc_device_attribute *soc_dev_attr; >> + struct soc_device *soc_dev; >> + struct device_node *root; >> + struct device_node *np; >> + void __iomem *exynos_chipid_base; >> + const struct of_device_id *match; >> + u32 product_id; >> + u32 revision; >> + >> + np = of_find_matching_node_and_match(NULL, >> + of_exynos_chipid_ids, &match); > > You don't use the match here, so how about either > of_find_matching_node() or of_find_compatible_node()? The latter looks > better (less calls inside) and actually you want just check one > compatible field? > Ok, will adopt this in v9. >> + if (!np) >> + return -ENODEV; >> + >> + exynos_chipid_base = of_iomap(np, 0); >> + >> + if (!exynos_chipid_base) >> + return PTR_ERR(exynos_chipid_base); >> + >> + product_id = readl_relaxed(exynos_chipid_base); > > Duplicated space before '='. Ok, will fix this. > >> + revision = product_id & EXYNOS_REV_MASK; >> + iounmap(exynos_chipid_base); >> + >> + soc_dev_attr = kzalloc(sizeof(*soc_dev_attr), GFP_KERNEL); >> + if (!soc_dev_attr) >> + return -ENODEV; >> + >> + soc_dev_attr->family = "Samsung Exynos"; >> + >> + root = of_find_node_by_path("/"); >> + of_property_read_string(root, "model", &soc_dev_attr->machine); >> + of_node_put(root); >> + >> + soc_dev_attr->revision = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "%x", revision); >> + soc_dev_attr->soc_id = product_id_to_soc_id(product_id); >> + >> + >> + pr_info("Exynos: CPU[%s] CPU_REV[0x%x] Detected\n", >> + product_id_to_soc_id(product_id), revision); >> + >> + soc_dev = soc_device_register(soc_dev_attr); >> + if (IS_ERR(soc_dev)) { >> + kfree(soc_dev_attr->revision); >> + kfree_const(soc_dev_attr->soc_id); > > It wasn't allocated with *_const, so no need to free it. Yes, will fix this. > > Best regards, > Krzysztof Thanks for review. Pankaj Dubey