[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1507199512.8473.8.camel@pengutronix.de>
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2017 12:31:52 +0200
From: Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>
To: Bryan O'Donoghue <pure.logic@...us-software.ie>,
richard.leitner@...data.com, srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org,
axel.lin@...ics.com, ping.bai@....com, d.schultz@...tec.de,
peng.fan@....com, van.freenix@...il.com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RESEND][PATCH 2/7] nvmem: imx-ocotp: Pass parameters via a
struct
Hi Bryan,
a few small nitpicks below.
On Wed, 2017-10-04 at 23:25 +0100, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
> It will be useful in later patches to know the register access mode
> and bit-shift to apply to a given input offset.
>
> Fixes: 0642bac7da42 ("nvmem: imx-ocotp: add write support")
>
> Signed-off-by: Bryan O'Donoghue <pure.logic@...us-software.ie>
> ---
> drivers/nvmem/imx-ocotp.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/nvmem/imx-ocotp.c b/drivers/nvmem/imx-ocotp.c
> index 17d160f..fed76a4 100644
> --- a/drivers/nvmem/imx-ocotp.c
> +++ b/drivers/nvmem/imx-ocotp.c
> @@ -53,11 +53,15 @@
>
> static DEFINE_MUTEX(ocotp_mutex);
>
> +struct octp_params {
Should this struct be called "ocotp_params"?
> + unsigned int nregs;
> +};
> +
> struct ocotp_priv {
> struct device *dev;
> struct clk *clk;
> void __iomem *base;
> - unsigned int nregs;
> + struct octp_params *params;
> struct nvmem_config *config;
> };
>
> @@ -121,8 +125,8 @@ static int imx_ocotp_read(void *context, unsigned
> int offset,
> index = offset >> 2;
> count = bytes >> 2;
>
> - if (count > (priv->nregs - index))
> - count = priv->nregs - index;
> + if (count > (priv->params->nregs - index))
> + count = priv->params->nregs - index;
>
> mutex_lock(&ocotp_mutex);
>
> @@ -308,12 +312,20 @@ static struct nvmem_config
> imx_ocotp_nvmem_config = {
> .reg_write = imx_ocotp_write,
> };
>
> +static const struct octp_params params[] = {
> + { .nregs = 128},
Missing whitespace.
> + { .nregs = 64},
> + { .nregs = 128},
> + { .nregs = 128},
> + { .nregs = 64},
> +};
> +
> static const struct of_device_id imx_ocotp_dt_ids[] = {
> - { .compatible = "fsl,imx6q-ocotp", (void *)128 },
> - { .compatible = "fsl,imx6sl-ocotp", (void *)64 },
> - { .compatible = "fsl,imx6sx-ocotp", (void *)128 },
> - { .compatible = "fsl,imx6ul-ocotp", (void *)128 },
> - { .compatible = "fsl,imx7d-ocotp", (void *)64 },
> + { .compatible = "fsl,imx6q-ocotp", (void *)¶ms[0] },
The (void *) cast is superfluous with this change, I'd also add the
missing ".data =":
{ .compatible = "fsl,imx6q-ocotp", .data = ¶ms[0] },
> + { .compatible = "fsl,imx6sl-ocotp", (void *)¶ms[1] },
> + { .compatible = "fsl,imx6sx-ocotp", (void *)¶ms[2] },
> + { .compatible = "fsl,imx6ul-ocotp", (void *)¶ms[3] },
> + { .compatible = "fsl,imx7d-ocotp", (void *)¶ms[4] },
> { },
> };
> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, imx_ocotp_dt_ids);
> @@ -342,8 +354,8 @@ static int imx_ocotp_probe(struct platform_device
> *pdev)
> return PTR_ERR(priv->clk);
>
> of_id = of_match_device(imx_ocotp_dt_ids, dev);
> - priv->nregs = (unsigned long)of_id->data;
> - imx_ocotp_nvmem_config.size = 4 * priv->nregs;
> + priv->params = (struct octp_params *)of_id->data;
> + imx_ocotp_nvmem_config.size = 4 * priv->params->nregs;
This would be a good opportunity to switch to of_device_get_match_data.
> imx_ocotp_nvmem_config.dev = dev;
> imx_ocotp_nvmem_config.priv = priv;
> priv->config = &imx_ocotp_nvmem_config;
regards
Philipp
Powered by blists - more mailing lists