[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160112155329.GB6050@localhost>
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 10:53:30 -0500
From: Damien Riegel <damien.riegel@...oirfairelinux.com>
To: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-can@...r.kernel.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@...ndegger.com>,
kernel@...oirfairelinux.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] can: sja1000: of: add per-compatible init hook
On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 08:52:06AM +0100, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
> On 12/24/2015 06:42 PM, Damien Riegel wrote:
> > This commit adds the capability to allocate and init private data
> > embedded in the sja1000_priv structure on a per-compatible basis. The
> > device node is passed as a parameter of the init callback to allow
> > parsing of custom device tree properties.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Damien Riegel <damien.riegel@...oirfairelinux.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/net/can/sja1000/sja1000_platform.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> > 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/can/sja1000/sja1000_platform.c b/drivers/net/can/sja1000/sja1000_platform.c
> > index 0552ed4..e0572d0 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/can/sja1000/sja1000_platform.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/can/sja1000/sja1000_platform.c
> > @@ -40,6 +40,11 @@ MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Socket-CAN driver for SJA1000 on the platform bus");
> > MODULE_ALIAS("platform:" DRV_NAME);
> > MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
> >
> > +struct sja1000_of_data {
> > + size_t priv_sz;
> > + int (*init)(struct sja1000_priv *priv, struct device_node *of);
> > +};
> > +
> > static u8 sp_read_reg8(const struct sja1000_priv *priv, int reg)
> > {
> > return ioread8(priv->reg_base + reg);
> > @@ -154,7 +159,8 @@ static void sp_populate_of(struct sja1000_priv *priv, struct device_node *of)
> > priv->cdr |= CDR_CBP; /* default */
> > }
> >
> > -static int sp_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > +static int __sp_probe(struct platform_device *pdev,
> > + const struct sja1000_of_data *of_data)
> > {
> > int err, irq = 0;
> > void __iomem *addr;
> > @@ -163,6 +169,7 @@ static int sp_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > struct resource *res_mem, *res_irq = NULL;
> > struct sja1000_platform_data *pdata;
> > struct device_node *of = pdev->dev.of_node;
> > + size_t priv_sz = of_data ? of_data->priv_sz : 0;
> >
> > pdata = dev_get_platdata(&pdev->dev);
> > if (!pdata && !of) {
> > @@ -191,7 +198,7 @@ static int sp_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > if (!irq && !res_irq)
> > return -ENODEV;
> >
> > - dev = alloc_sja1000dev(0);
> > + dev = alloc_sja1000dev(priv_sz);
> > if (!dev)
> > return -ENOMEM;
> > priv = netdev_priv(dev);
> > @@ -213,6 +220,12 @@ static int sp_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > else
> > sp_populate(priv, pdata, res_mem->flags);
> >
> > + if (of_data && of_data->init) {
> > + err = of_data->init(priv, of);
> > + if (err)
> > + goto exit_free;
> > + }
> > +
> > platform_set_drvdata(pdev, dev);
> > SET_NETDEV_DEV(dev, &pdev->dev);
> >
> > @@ -248,6 +261,28 @@ static const struct of_device_id sp_of_table[] = {
> > };
> > MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, sp_of_table);
> >
> > +static const struct sja1000_of_data *sp_get_of_data(struct device_node *of)
> > +{
> > + const struct of_device_id *id;
> > +
> > + if (!of)
> > + return NULL;
> > +
> > + id = of_match_node(sp_of_table, of);
> > + if (!id)
> > + return NULL;
> > +
> > + return id->data;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int sp_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > +{
> > + struct device_node *of = pdev->dev.of_node;
> > + const struct sja1000_of_data *of_data = sp_get_of_data(of);
> > +
> > + return __sp_probe(pdev, of_data);
> > +}
>
> Please merge these two into the original sp_probe function, as there
> already is a test for pdev->dev.of_node.
Ok. sp_get_of_data makes use of sp_of_table, so either I move sp_probe
below sp_of_table, or I use a forward declaration. Which one do you
prefer?
Damien
Powered by blists - more mailing lists