[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZJRATnQ6R+EYnUok@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2023 15:36:30 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
To: Martin Zaťovič <m.zatovic1@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, beanhuo@...ron.com,
nipun.gupta@....com, linus.walleij@...aro.org, mwen@...lia.com,
bvanassche@....org, arnd@...db.de, ogabbay@...nel.org,
linux@...y.sk, jacek.lawrynowicz@...ux.intel.com,
geert+renesas@...der.be, benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com,
masahiroy@...nel.org, yangyicong@...ilicon.com,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 0/4] Wiegand bus driver and GPIO bitbanged Wiegand
On Wed, May 10, 2023 at 06:22:39PM +0200, Martin Zaťovič wrote:
> Hello,
>
> thank you for the feedback regarding the previous version of this patch series.
> I have tried to follow all of the advice I got and fix all the pointed issues.
> One of the main issues was the usage of of API for device registration. This
> has now been fixed to use fwnode API, however I was not yet able to get rid of
> the of_device include, since it is required for of_driver_match_device. Please
> let me know if this is correct.
Since it is a bus, I think we need that.
> CHANGELOG:
>
> wiegand.c:
> - changed ID allocation API from IDR to IDA, since the references associated to
> the IDs are not needed
> - removed the board_lock mutex, because it was only guarding the allocacion
> and freeing of IDs, which is already supported by IDA API
> - restructured the file, so that most functions are close to their caller, or
> defined them at the top for better code readability
> - in the function devm_wiegand_register_controller, the devres management of
> the pointer to wiegand_controller structure has been replaced with
> devm_add_action_or_reset function. It was intended to do the same with
> devm_wiegand_alloc_controller, however, the kernel kept panicing, despite the
> call order of the unregister and release functions being proper(same as with
> devres managed pointer). Please let me know if this is an absolute must, if so
> I will look into it further.
What panic? Can you elaborate?
> - moved the miscdevice from wiegand-gpio driver to be a part of the bus
> driver. Now every controller is associated a /dev file. The file operation
> functions were simply moved and renamed and the miscdevice structure was moved
> to be a part of wiegand_controller structure
> - since now every controller has a miscdevice assosciated, the data_buffer was
> also moved to be a part of the controller structure, and it was made a bitmap
> - used fwnode API for device registration instead of of API
> - removed warnings when driver fails to get wiegand properties, instead
> implemented mechanism for setting a default value similar I2C
> - removed the driver matching code in register driver, as
> of_driver_match_device does that already
> - made wiegand_device and opaque pointer
> - changed the terminology to primary and secondary
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists