linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 6/7] i2c: designware: enable SLAVE in platform module

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1482942696.9552.172.camel@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 28 Dec 2016 18:31:36 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Luis Oliveira <Luis.Oliveira@...opsys.com>, wsa@...-dreams.de,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
        jarkko.nikula@...ux.intel.com, mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com,
        linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Ramiro.Oliveira@...opsys.com, Joao.Pinto@...opsys.com,
        CARLOS.PALMINHA@...opsys.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 6/7] i2c: designware: enable SLAVE in platform module

On Wed, 2016-12-28 at 15:53 +0000, Luis Oliveira wrote:
> 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.

Okay, can you provide an excerpt to see how it will look like in DTS?

 
> > > -	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.

My point is to drop it completely.

> > 
> > > +		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?

Nope. See above.


-- 
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Intel Finland Oy