| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 08:45:19 +0000
From: "Vaittinen, Matti" <Matti.Vaittinen@...rohmeurope.com>
To: "lgirdwood@...il.com" <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
"marek.vasut+renesas@...il.com" <marek.vasut+renesas@...il.com>,
"yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com" <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com>,
"broonie@...nel.org" <broonie@...nel.org>,
"bgolaszewski@...libre.com" <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
"lee.jones@...aro.org" <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
"linus.walleij@...aro.org" <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
CC: linux-power <linux-power@...rohmeurope.com>,
"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
"khiem.nguyen.xt@...esas.com" <khiem.nguyen.xt@...esas.com>,
"linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 11/12] mfd: bd9571mwv: Make the driver more generic
On Wed, 2020-12-16 at 10:25 +0200, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> On Wed, 2020-12-16 at 16:37 +0900, Yoshihiro Shimoda wrote:
> > From: Khiem Nguyen <khiem.nguyen.xt@...esas.com>
> >
> > Since the driver supports BD9571MWV PMIC only,
> > this patch makes the functions and data structure become more
> > generic
> > so that it can support other PMIC variants as well.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Khiem Nguyen <khiem.nguyen.xt@...esas.com>
> > [shimoda: rebase and refactor]
> > Signed-off-by: Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@...rohmeurope.com>
>
> > ---
> > drivers/mfd/bd9571mwv.c | 95 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> > ------------
> > include/linux/mfd/bd9571mwv.h | 18 ++------
> > 2 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/mfd/bd9571mwv.c b/drivers/mfd/bd9571mwv.c
> > index 49e968e..ccf1a60 100644
> > --- a/drivers/mfd/bd9571mwv.c
> > +++ b/drivers/mfd/bd9571mwv.c
> > @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
> > * ROHM BD9571MWV-M MFD driver
> > *
> > * Copyright (C) 2017 Marek Vasut <marek.vasut+renesas@...il.com>
> > + * Copyright (C) 2020 Renesas Electronics Corporation
> > *
> > * Based on the TPS65086 driver
> > */
> > @@ -14,6 +15,19 @@
> >
> > #include <linux/mfd/bd9571mwv.h>
> >
> > +/**
> > + * struct bd957x_data - internal data for the bd957x driver
> > + *
> > + * Internal data to distinguish bd957x variants
> > + */
> > +struct bd957x_data {
> > + char *part_name;
> > + const struct regmap_config *regmap_config;
> > + const struct regmap_irq_chip *irq_chip;
> > + const struct mfd_cell *cells;
> > + int num_cells;
> > +};
> > +
>
> I do like the way you placed the variant data in owns structs. Well
> thought.
>
> > static const struct mfd_cell bd9571mwv_cells[] = {
> > { .name = "bd9571mwv-regulator", },
> > { .name = "bd9571mwv-gpio", },
> > @@ -102,13 +116,21 @@ static struct regmap_irq_chip
> > bd9571mwv_irq_chip = {
> > .num_irqs = ARRAY_SIZE(bd9571mwv_irqs),
> > };
> >
> > -static int bd9571mwv_identify(struct bd9571mwv *bd)
> > +static const struct bd957x_data bd9571mwv_data = {
> > + .part_name = BD9571MWV_PART_NAME,
> > + .regmap_config = &bd9571mwv_regmap_config,
> > + .irq_chip = &bd9571mwv_irq_chip,
> > + .cells = bd9571mwv_cells,
> > + .num_cells = ARRAY_SIZE(bd9571mwv_cells),
> > +};
> > +
> > +static int bd9571mwv_identify(struct device *dev, struct regmap
> > *regmap,
> > + const char *part_name)
> > {
> > - struct device *dev = bd->dev;
> > unsigned int value;
> > int ret;
> >
> > - ret = regmap_read(bd->regmap, BD9571MWV_VENDOR_CODE, &value);
> > + ret = regmap_read(regmap, BD9571MWV_VENDOR_CODE, &value);
> > if (ret) {
> > dev_err(dev, "Failed to read vendor code register
> > (ret=%i)\n",
> > ret);
> > @@ -121,27 +143,20 @@ static int bd9571mwv_identify(struct
> > bd9571mwv
> > *bd)
> > return -EINVAL;
> > }
> >
> > - ret = regmap_read(bd->regmap, BD9571MWV_PRODUCT_CODE, &value);
> > + ret = regmap_read(regmap, BD9571MWV_PRODUCT_CODE, &value);
> > if (ret) {
> > dev_err(dev, "Failed to read product code register
> > (ret=%i)\n",
> > ret);
> > return ret;
> > }
> > -
> > - if (value != BD9571MWV_PRODUCT_CODE_VAL) {
> > - dev_err(dev, "Invalid product code ID %02x (expected
> > %02x)\n",
> > - value, BD9571MWV_PRODUCT_CODE_VAL);
> > - return -EINVAL;
> > - }
> > -
> > - ret = regmap_read(bd->regmap, BD9571MWV_PRODUCT_REVISION,
> > &value);
> > + ret = regmap_read(regmap, BD9571MWV_PRODUCT_REVISION, &value);
> > if (ret) {
> > dev_err(dev, "Failed to read revision register
> > (ret=%i)\n",
> > ret);
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > - dev_info(dev, "Device: BD9571MWV rev. %d\n", value & 0xff);
> > + dev_info(dev, "Device: %s rev. %d\n", part_name, value & 0xff);
> >
> > return 0;
> > }
> > @@ -149,38 +164,48 @@ static int bd9571mwv_identify(struct
> > bd9571mwv
> > *bd)
> > static int bd9571mwv_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
> > const struct i2c_device_id *ids)
> > {
> > - struct bd9571mwv *bd;
> > - int ret;
> > -
> > - bd = devm_kzalloc(&client->dev, sizeof(*bd), GFP_KERNEL);
> > - if (!bd)
> > - return -ENOMEM;
> > -
> > - i2c_set_clientdata(client, bd);
> > - bd->dev = &client->dev;
> > - bd->irq = client->irq;
> > + const struct bd957x_data *data;
> > + struct device *dev = &client->dev;
> > + struct regmap *regmap;
> > + struct regmap_irq_chip_data *irq_data;
> > + int ret, irq = client->irq;
> > +
> > + /* Read the PMIC product code */
> > + ret = i2c_smbus_read_byte_data(client, BD9571MWV_PRODUCT_CODE);
>
> Having to use the i2c_smbus_read_byte_data for a device which is
> going
> to be used with regmap slightly bugs me. But as you want to do the
> runtime probing, then this access must be done prior regmap
> registration - so I can't think of a better way. :(
I just noticed that reading the product code is something one would
expect the bd9571mwv_identify() be doing. Now when you do read product
code already here, the additional value brought by bd9571mwv_identify()
is quite small. If you ever re-spin this, please consider if
bd9571mwv_identify() is actually usefull or if product code reading
should be done in that function - or if the usefull checks (if any)
from the identify() could be inlined here :)
Best Regards
Matti Vaittinen
Powered by blists - more mailing lists