[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56F3B86E.4050002@mentor.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2016 11:50:38 +0200
From: Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir_zapolskiy@...tor.com>
To: Peter Rosin <peda@...ator.liu.se>
CC: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>, Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
Peter Korsgaard <peter.korsgaard@...co.com>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@....de>,
Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
Peter Meerwald <pmeerw@...erw.net>,
Antti Palosaari <crope@....fi>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@....samsung.com>,
Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
Adriana Reus <adriana.reus@...el.com>,
Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
Hans Verkuil <hans.verkuil@...co.com>,
Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@...dl.org>,
Olli Salonen <olli.salonen@....fi>,
<linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-media@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/8] i2c-mux: add common core data for every mux
instance
Hi Peter,
On 05.01.2016 17:57, Peter Rosin wrote:
> From: Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>
>
> The initial core mux structure starts off small with only the parent
> adapter pointer, which all muxes have, and a priv pointer for mux
> driver private data.
>
> Add i2c_mux_alloc function to unify the creation of a mux.
>
> Where appropriate, pass around the mux core structure instead of the
> parent adapter or the driver private data.
>
> Remove the parent adapter pointer from the driver private data for all
> mux drivers.
>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>
is it still under review? If yes, please find one question from me below :)
[snip]
> @@ -196,21 +195,21 @@ static int i2c_arbitrator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> dev_err(dev, "Cannot parse i2c-parent\n");
> return -EINVAL;
> }
> - arb->parent = of_get_i2c_adapter_by_node(parent_np);
> + muxc->parent = of_find_i2c_adapter_by_node(parent_np);
why do you prefer here to use "unlocked" version of API?
Foe example would it be safe/possible to unload an I2C bus device driver
module or unbind I2C device itself in runtime?
> of_node_put(parent_np);
> - if (!arb->parent) {
> + if (!muxc->parent) {
> dev_err(dev, "Cannot find parent bus\n");
> return -EPROBE_DEFER;
> }
>
> /* Actually add the mux adapter */
> - arb->child = i2c_add_mux_adapter(arb->parent, dev, arb, 0, 0, 0,
> + arb->child = i2c_add_mux_adapter(muxc, dev, arb, 0, 0, 0,
> i2c_arbitrator_select,
> i2c_arbitrator_deselect);
> if (!arb->child) {
> dev_err(dev, "Failed to add adapter\n");
> ret = -ENODEV;
> - i2c_put_adapter(arb->parent);
> + i2c_put_adapter(muxc->parent);
> }
>
> return ret;
--
With best wishes,
Vladimir
Powered by blists - more mailing lists