Message-ID: <CACRpkdYfGmVBYgAc4KZGN6634WM_EyzNj_SBbALEs4WYipXRQA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 4 Feb 2017 11:14:48 +0100
From:   Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:     Sebastien Bourdelin <sebastien.bourdelin@...oirfairelinux.com>
Cc:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel <kernel@...oirfairelinux.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@....com>,
        Mark Featherston <mark@...eddedarm.com>, kris@...eddedarm.com,
        Simon Horman <horms+renesas@...ge.net.au>,
        Thierry Reding <treding@...dia.com>,
        Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Sascha Hauer <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
        Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ana.be>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        damien.riegel@...oirfairelinux.com,
        Lucile Quirion <lucile.quirion@...oirfairelinux.com>,
        Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        "Suzuki K. Poulose" <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] bus: add driver for the Technologic Systems NBUS

On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 8:47 PM, Sebastien Bourdelin
<sebastien.bourdelin@...oirfairelinux.com> wrote:

> This driver implements a GPIOs bit-banged bus, called the NBUS by
> Technologic Systems. It is used to communicate with the peripherals in
> the FPGA on the TS-4600 SoM.
>
> ---
> Changes v1 -> v2:
>   - rebase on master
>   - the driver now populate its child nodes
>   - remove the 'default y' option from the Kconfig
>   - rework the driver to not use singleton anymore (suggested by Linus
>   Walleij)
>   - replace the use of the legacy GPIO API with gpiod (suggested by
>   Linus Walleij)
>   - use the ts vendor prefix for gpios (suggested by Rob Herring)
>
> Signed-off-by: Sebastien Bourdelin <sebastien.bourdelin@...oirfairelinux.com>

This is starting to look nice!

More comments:

First, you sprinked "inline" like cinnamon over everything, skip that. The
compiler will inline selectively as it seems fit if you turn on optimization.

> +static DEFINE_MUTEX(ts_nbus_lock);

Move this into struct ts_nbus, initialize the mutex in probe()
and just mutex_lock(&ts_nbus->lock); etc.

> + * the txrx gpio is used by the FPGA to know if the following transactions
> + * should be handled to read or write a value.
> + */
> +static inline void ts_nbus_set_mode(struct ts_nbus *ts_nbus, int mode)

Why inline? Let the compiler decide about that.

> +{
> +       if (mode == TS_NBUS_READ_MODE)

This mode parameter is too complicated. Isn't it just a bool?
(not superimportant)

> +               gpiod_set_value_cansleep(ts_nbus->txrx, 0);
> +       else
> +               gpiod_set_value_cansleep(ts_nbus->txrx, 1);
> +}

You're certainly just using it as a bool.

> +static inline void ts_nbus_set_direction(struct ts_nbus *ts_nbus, int direction)
> +{
> +       int i;
> +
> +       for (i = 0; i < ts_nbus->data->ndescs; i++) {
> +               if (direction == TS_NBUS_DIRECTION_IN)
> +                       gpiod_direction_input(ts_nbus->data->desc[i]);
> +               else
> +                       gpiod_direction_output(ts_nbus->data->desc[i], 1);

Add a comment here explaining why you driver the line high by default
when setting it to output mode. It certainly makes sense but how
does the electronics work and why?

> +static inline void ts_nbus_reset_bus(struct ts_nbus *ts_nbus)
> +{
> +       int i;
> +       int values[ts_nbus->data->ndescs];
> +
> +       for (i = 0; i < ts_nbus->data->ndescs; i++)
> +               values[i] = 0;
> +
> +       gpiod_set_array_value_cansleep(ts_nbus->data->ndescs,
> +                       ts_nbus->data->desc, values);
> +       gpiod_set_value_cansleep(ts_nbus->csn, 0);
> +       gpiod_set_value_cansleep(ts_nbus->strobe, 0);
> +       gpiod_set_value_cansleep(ts_nbus->ale, 0);

Add a comment about the process taken when this bus is reset. We
see what is happening, but why?

> +/*
> + * let the FPGA knows it can process.
> + */
> +static inline void ts_nbus_start_transaction(struct ts_nbus *ts_nbus)

Why inline?

> +{
> +       gpiod_set_value_cansleep(ts_nbus->strobe, 1);
> +}

For example this is a well commented function. We see what is happening
and stobe has an evident name. Nice work!

> +/*
> + * return the byte value read from the data gpios.
> + */
> +static inline u8 ts_nbus_read_byte(struct ts_nbus *ts_nbus)

Why inline?

Then this cannot fail can it?

I think this accessor should be changed to return an error code.

static int ts_nbus_read_byte(struct ts_nbus *ts_nbus, u8 *val);

Then if the return value from the function is != 0 it failed. Simple
to check, just pass a pointer to the value you are getting in
val.

I KNOW I KNOW, not you have to put in error handling everywhere,
what a DRAG! But we usually follow that pattern because...

> +{
> +       struct gpio_descs *gpios = ts_nbus->data;
> +       int i;
> +       u8 value = 0;
> +
> +       for (i = 0; i < gpios->ndescs; i++)

Using gpios->ndescs is a bit overparametrized right? Isn't it
simply 8 bits? Just putting 8 there is fine IMO. All 8 descs
must be available for the thing to work anyway right?

> +               if (gpiod_get_value_cansleep(gpios->desc[i]))

This can fail and you should return an error if < 0...

You are ignoring that right now. That is why the function should
be returning an error code that is usually 0.

> +                       value |= 1 << i;

Use:
#include <linux/bitops.h>

value |= BIT(i);

> +/*
> + * set the data gpios accordingly to the byte value.
> + */
> +static inline void ts_nbus_write_byte(struct ts_nbus *ts_nbus, u8 byte)
> +{
> +       struct gpio_descs *gpios = ts_nbus->data;
> +       int i;
> +       int values[gpios->ndescs];
> +
> +       for (i = 0; i < gpios->ndescs; i++)
> +               if (byte & (1 << i))
> +                       values[i] = 1;
> +               else
> +                       values[i] = 0;
> +
> +       gpiod_set_array_value_cansleep(gpios->ndescs, gpios->desc, values);

This can also fail and you should check the return code and print an error
message if it does.

> +/*
> + * reading the bus consists of resetting the bus, then notifying the FPGA to
> + * send the data in the data gpios and return the read value.
> + */
> +static inline u8 ts_nbus_read_bus(struct ts_nbus *ts_nbus)

All this inline...

> +/*
> + * writing to the bus consists of resetting the bus, then define the type of
> + * command (address/value), write the data and notify the FPGA to retrieve the
> + * value in the data gpios.
> + */
> +static inline void ts_nbus_write_bus(struct ts_nbus *ts_nbus, int cmd, u8 value)
> +{
> +       ts_nbus_reset_bus(ts_nbus);
> +
> +       if (cmd == TS_NBUS_WRITE_ADR)
> +               gpiod_set_value_cansleep(ts_nbus->ale, 1);
> +
> +       ts_nbus_write_byte(ts_nbus, value);
> +       ts_nbus_start_transaction(ts_nbus);

Error codes?

> +       /* reading value MSB first */
> +       do {
> +               val = 0;
> +               for (i = 1; i >= 0; i--)
> +                       val |= (ts_nbus_read_bus(ts_nbus) << (i * 8));

Hard to deal with errors in this loop!

> +               gpiod_set_value_cansleep(ts_nbus->csn, 1);

Here too.

> +++ b/include/linux/ts-nbus.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
> +/*
> + * Copyright (c) 2016 - Savoir-faire Linux
> + * Author: Sebastien Bourdelin <sebastien.bourdelin@...oirfairelinux.com>
> + *
> + * This file is licensed under the terms of the GNU General Public
> + * License version 2. This program is licensed "as is" without any
> + * warranty of any kind, whether express or implied.
> + */
> +
> +#ifndef _TS_NBUS_H
> +#define _TS_NBUS_H
> +
> +struct ts_nbus {
> +       struct pwm_device *pwm;
> +       struct gpio_descs *data;
> +       struct gpio_desc *csn;
> +       struct gpio_desc *txrx;
> +       struct gpio_desc *strobe;
> +       struct gpio_desc *ale;
> +       struct gpio_desc *rdy;
> +};

Is any consumer really looking into this struct? If not, why
do you expose it?

Move it to the ts-nbus.c file.

The only thing you need in this header is:

struct ts_nbus;

Just that one line. The rest of the code, like the declarations
below and all call sites, are just dealing with "pointers to something",
they don't need to know what it is. You'll be amazed to see how it compiles.
struct gpio_desc works exactly like that.

> +extern u16 ts_nbus_read(struct ts_nbus *, u8 adr);
> +extern int ts_nbus_write(struct ts_nbus *, u8 adr, u16 value);

I suspect the first function should be augmented to return an error code.

Yours,
Linus Walleij

Powered by blists - more mailing lists