From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1751785AbcL1Pxu (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Wed, 28 Dec 2016 10:53:50 -0500
Received: from smtprelay2.synopsys.com ([198.182.60.111]:43510 "EHLO
        smtprelay.synopsys.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1750966AbcL1Pxs (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 28 Dec 2016 10:53:48 -0500
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 6/7] i2c: designware: enable SLAVE in platform module
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
        Luis Oliveira <Luis.Oliveira@synopsys.com>, <wsa@the-dreams.de>,
        <robh+dt@kernel.org>, <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        <jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com>, <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>,
        <linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org>, <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <cover.1482934380.git.lolivei@synopsys.com>
 <ea8b611c3b7c2af8088e2dbc16554af5c8aed368.1482934380.git.lolivei@synopsys.com>
 <1482939844.9552.165.camel@linux.intel.com>
CC: <Ramiro.Oliveira@synopsys.com>, <Joao.Pinto@synopsys.com>,
        <CARLOS.PALMINHA@synopsys.com>
From: Luis Oliveira <Luis.Oliveira@synopsys.com>
Message-ID: <20e47113-efd7-787c-b2f8-39e9fd8b83d2@synopsys.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2016 15:53:40 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1482939844.9552.165.camel@linux.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [10.107.25.45]
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 28-Dec-16 15:44, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-12-28 at 14:43 +0000, Luis Oliveira wrote:
>> - Slave mode selected in platform module (devicetree support only)
>> - Check for ACPI - not supported in SLAVE mode:
>>   - Changed the ifndef style to the use of ACPI_HANDLE that returns
>> NULL
>>     if the device was not enumerated from ACPI namespace.
> 
> I'm not sure what is wrong with ACPI?

I dont have a way to test it. Just that.
>  
>> @@ -264,9 +297,16 @@ static int dw_i2c_plat_probe(struct
>> platform_device *pdev)
>>  	if (r)
>>  		return r;
>>  
>> -	dev->functionality = I2C_FUNC_10BIT_ADDR |
>> DW_IC_DEFAULT_FUNCTIONALITY;
>> -
>> -	i2c_dw_configure_master(pdev);
> 
>> +	if (ACPI_HANDLE(&pdev->dev) == NULL) {
> 
> I don't think you need this at all.

This is to avoid the use of the "ifdef" style I used before.
> 
>> +		device_for_each_child_node(&pdev->dev, child) {
> 
> This is resource agnostic.
> 
>> +			fwnode_property_read_u32(child, "reg", &reg);
> 
> This is as well.

Are you suggesting I use of_ functions?
> 
>> +			if (reg & I2C_OWN_SLAVE_ADDRESS)
>> +				i2c_dw_configure_slave(pdev);
>> +			else
>> +				i2c_dw_configure_master(pdev);
>> +		}
>> +	} else
>> +		i2c_dw_configure_master(pdev);
> 
>