[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180601203928.GD9838@xps15>
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 14:39:28 -0600
From: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>
To: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, sudeep.holla@....com,
robh@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com, frowand.list@...il.com,
matt.sealey@....com, charles.garcia-tobin@....com,
john.horley@....com, mike.leach@...aro.org,
coresight@...ts.linaro.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 7/8] dts: coresight: Define new bindings for
direction of data flow
On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 02:16:06PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> So far we have relied on an undocumented property "slave-mode",
> to indicate if the given port is input or not. Since we are
> redefining the coresight bindings, define new property for the
> "direction" of data flow for a given connection endpoint in the
> device.
>
> Each endpoint must define the following property.
>
> - "direction" : 0 => Port is input
> 1 => Port is output
>
> Cc: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>
> ---
> drivers/hwtracing/coresight/of_coresight.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++----
You haven't documented the binding in bindings/arm/coresight.txt the same way
you did with "coresight,hwid". I'm guessing you simply forgot to do a "git add"
on the file when preparing the patchset.
> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/of_coresight.c b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/of_coresight.c
> index 99d7a9c..63c1668 100644
> --- a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/of_coresight.c
> +++ b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/of_coresight.c
> @@ -52,7 +52,19 @@ of_coresight_get_endpoint_device(struct device_node *endpoint)
> endpoint, of_dev_node_match);
> }
>
> -static void of_coresight_get_ports(const struct device_node *node,
> +static bool of_coresight_ep_is_input(struct device *dev, struct device_node *ep_node)
I suggested of_coresight_endpoint_get_port_id() in my review of 6/8. I'm good
with either "ep" or "endpoint", as long as the names are consistent.
> +{
> + u32 dir;
> +
> + if (!of_property_read_u32(ep_node, "direction", &dir))
> + return dir == 0;
> +
> + dev_warn_once(dev, "Missing mandatory \"direction\" property!\n");
> + return of_property_read_bool(ep_node, "slave-mode");
> +}
> +
> +static void of_coresight_get_ports(struct device *dev,
> + const struct device_node *node,
> int *nr_inport, int *nr_outport)
> {
> struct device_node *ep = NULL;
> @@ -63,7 +75,7 @@ static void of_coresight_get_ports(const struct device_node *node,
> if (!ep)
> break;
>
> - if (of_property_read_bool(ep, "slave-mode"))
> + if (of_coresight_ep_is_input(dev, ep))
> in++;
> else
> out++;
> @@ -149,7 +161,7 @@ of_get_coresight_platform_data(struct device *dev,
> pdata->name = dev_name(dev);
>
> /* Get the number of input and output port for this component */
> - of_coresight_get_ports(node, &pdata->nr_inport, &pdata->nr_outport);
> + of_coresight_get_ports(dev, node, &pdata->nr_inport, &pdata->nr_outport);
>
> if (pdata->nr_outport) {
> ret = of_coresight_alloc_memory(dev, pdata);
> @@ -168,7 +180,7 @@ of_get_coresight_platform_data(struct device *dev,
> * No need to deal with input ports, processing for as
> * processing for output ports will deal with them.
> */
> - if (of_find_property(ep, "slave-mode", NULL))
> + if (of_coresight_ep_is_input(dev, ep))
> continue;
>
> outport = of_graph_ep_coresight_get_port_id(dev, ep);
> --
> 2.7.4
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists