[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190516123120.GB14298@lunn.ch>
Date: Thu, 16 May 2019 14:31:20 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Sagar Shrikant Kadam <sagar.kadam@...ive.com>
Cc: robh+dt@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com, peter@...sgaard.com,
palmer@...ive.com, paul.walmsley@...ive.com,
linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] i2c-ocores: sifive: add polling mode workaround
for FU540-C000 SoC
> @@ -682,13 +693,24 @@ static int ocores_i2c_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>
> irq = platform_get_irq(pdev, 0);
> if (irq == -ENXIO) {
> - i2c->flags |= OCORES_FLAG_POLL;
> + /*
> + * Set a OCORES_FLAG_BROKEN_IRQ to enable workaround for
> + * FU540-C000 SoC in polling mode interface of i2c-ocore driver.
> + * Else enable default polling mode interface for SIFIVE/OCORE
> + * device types.
> + */
> + match = of_match_node(ocores_i2c_match, pdev->dev.of_node);
> + if (match && (long)match->data ==
> + (TYPE_SIFIVE_REV0 | OCORES_FLAG_BROKEN_IRQ))
This looks wrong. You added:
+ {
+ .compatible = "sifive,fu540-c000-i2c",
+ .data = (void *)TYPE_SIFIVE_REV0,
+ },
+ {
+ .compatible = "sifive,i2c0",
+ .data = (void *)TYPE_SIFIVE_REV0,
+ },
So match->data just has TYPE_SIFIVE_REV0.
> + i2c->flags |= OCORES_FLAG_BROKEN_IRQ;
> + else
> + i2c->flags |= OCORES_FLAG_POLL;
These two don't need to be exclusive. It makes more sense to say
SIFIVE needs to poll and it its IRQ is broken. A lot of your other
changes then go away.
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists