[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75VdtwyCj7emc7Bk87q7kMQA0sSX81-aK-fMq4qTfTF-c_g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 17:25:41 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Evan Green <evgreen@...omium.org>
Cc: Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>, Wolfram Sang <wsa@...nel.org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
Peter Korsgaard <peter.korsgaard@...co.com>,
linux-i2c <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v3 2/2] i2c: i2c-mux-gpio: Enable this driver in
ACPI land
On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 1:40 AM Evan Green <evgreen@...omium.org> wrote:
>
> Enable i2c-mux-gpio devices to be defined via ACPI. The idle-state
> property translates directly to a fwnode_property_*() call. The child
> reg property translates naturally into _ADR in ACPI.
>
> The i2c-parent binding is a relic from the days when the bindings
> dictated that all direct children of an I2C controller had to be I2C
> devices. These days that's no longer required. The i2c-mux can sit as a
> direct child of its parent controller, which is where it makes the most
> sense from a hardware description perspective. For the ACPI
> implementation we'll assume that's always how the i2c-mux-gpio is
> instantiated.
...
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
> +
> +static int i2c_mux_gpio_get_acpi_adr(struct device *dev,
> + struct fwnode_handle *fwdev,
> + unsigned int *adr)
> +
> +{
> + unsigned long long adr64;
> + acpi_status status;
> +
> + status = acpi_evaluate_integer(ACPI_HANDLE_FWNODE(fwdev),
> + METHOD_NAME__ADR,
> + NULL, &adr64);
> +
> + if (!ACPI_SUCCESS(status)) {
> + dev_err(dev, "Cannot get address\n");
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + *adr = adr64;
> + if (*adr != adr64) {
> + dev_err(dev, "Address out of range\n");
> + return -ERANGE;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +#else
> +
> +static int i2c_mux_gpio_get_acpi_adr(struct device *dev,
> + struct fwnode_handle *fwdev,
> + unsigned int *adr)
> +{
> + return -EINVAL;
> +}
> +
> +#endif
I'm wondering if you may use acpi_find_child_device() here.
Or is it a complementary function?
...
> + device_for_each_child_node(dev, child) {
> + if (is_of_node(child)) {
> + fwnode_property_read_u32(child, "reg", values + i);
> +
> + } else if (is_acpi_node(child)) {
> + rc = i2c_mux_gpio_get_acpi_adr(dev, child, values + i);
> + if (rc)
> + return rc;
> + }
> +
> i++;
> }
And for this I already told in two different threads with similar code
that perhaps we need common helper that will check reg followed by
_ADR.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists