[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <71609986-9b97-44ee-86a1-b8a8b9d2829b@wanadoo.fr>
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2024 19:56:03 +0200
From: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
To: Farouk Bouabid <farouk.bouabid@...rry.de>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>,
Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>, Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@...nel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Quentin Schulz
<quentin.schulz@...rry.de>, Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>
Cc: linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/7] i2c: muxes: add support for mule i2c multiplexer
Le 11/06/2024 à 13:43, Farouk Bouabid a écrit :
> Mule is an MCU that emulates a set of I2C devices which are reachable
> through an I2C-mux.
>
> The emulated devices share a single I2C address with the mux itself
> where the requested register is what determines which logic is executed
> (mux logic or device logic):
>
> 1- The devices on the mux can be selected (mux function) by writing the
> appropriate device number to an I2C config register (0xff) that is not
> used by any device logic.
>
> 2- Any access to a register other than the config register will be
> handled by the previously selected device.
>
> Signed-off-by: Farouk Bouabid <farouk.bouabid@...rry.de>
> ---
Hi,
...
> +static int mule_i2c_mux_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
> +{
> + struct i2c_adapter *adap = client->adapter;
> + struct mule_i2c_reg_mux *priv;
> + struct i2c_mux_core *muxc;
> + struct device_node *dev;
> + unsigned int readback;
> + int ndev, ret;
> + bool old_fw;
> +
> + /* Count devices on the mux */
> + ndev = of_get_child_count(client->dev.of_node);
> + dev_dbg(&client->dev, "%u devices on the mux\n", ndev);
Should this be %d?
> +
> + muxc = i2c_mux_alloc(adap, &client->dev,
> + ndev, sizeof(*priv),
> + I2C_MUX_LOCKED,
> + mux_select, mux_deselect);
Nitpick: this could be written with less lines.
> + if (!muxc)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + muxc->share_addr_with_children = 1;
> + priv = i2c_mux_priv(muxc);
> +
> + priv->regmap = devm_regmap_init_i2c(client, &mule_regmap_config);
> + if (IS_ERR(priv->regmap))
> + return dev_err_probe(&client->dev, PTR_ERR(priv->regmap),
> + "Failed to allocate i2c register map\n");
> +
> + i2c_set_clientdata(client, muxc);
> +
> + /*
> + * Mux 0 is guaranteed to exist on all old and new mule fw.
> + * mule fw without mux support will accept write ops to the
> + * config register, but readback returns 0xff (register not updated).
> + */
> + ret = mux_select(muxc, 0);
Should this 0 be MUX_DEFAULT_DEV (for consistency)?
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + ret = regmap_read(priv->regmap, MUX_CONFIG_REG, &readback);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + old_fw = (readback != 0);
> +
> + ret = devm_add_action_or_reset(&client->dev, mux_remove, muxc);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + /* Create device adapters */
> + for_each_child_of_node(client->dev.of_node, dev) {
> + u32 reg;
> +
> + ret = of_property_read_u32(dev, "reg", ®);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(&client->dev, "No reg property found for %s: %d\n",
> + of_node_full_name(dev), ret);
return dev_err_probe() as above?
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + if (old_fw && reg != 0) {
> + dev_warn(&client->dev,
> + "Mux %d not supported, please update Mule FW\n", reg);
> + continue;
> + }
> +
> + ret = mux_select(muxc, reg);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_warn(&client->dev,
> + "Mux %d not supported, please update Mule FW\n", reg);
> + continue;
> + }
> +
> + ret = i2c_mux_add_adapter(muxc, 0, reg, 0);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(&client->dev, "Failed to add i2c mux adapter %d: %d\n", reg, ret);
return dev_err_probe() as above?
> + return ret;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + mux_deselect(muxc, MUX_DEFAULT_DEV);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists