Re: [RFC v8 net-next 08/16] mfd: ocelot: add support for the vsc7512 chip via spi

[Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>]

On Tue, 10 May 2022, Colin Foster wrote:

> On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 04:32:26PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Mon, 09 May 2022, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > 
> > > On Mon, May 09, 2022 at 04:49:22PM -0700, Colin Foster wrote:
> > > > > > +struct regmap *ocelot_init_regmap_from_resource(struct device *child,
> > > > > > +						const struct resource *res)
> > > > > > +{
> > > > > > +	struct device *dev = child->parent;
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +	return ocelot_spi_devm_init_regmap(dev, child, res);
> > > > > 
> > > > > So much for being bus-agnostic :-/
> > > > > Maybe get the struct ocelot_ddata and call ocelot_spi_devm_init_regmap()
> > > > > via a function pointer which is populated by ocelot-spi.c? If you do
> > > > > that don't forget to clean up drivers/mfd/ocelot.h of SPI specific stuff.
> > > > 
> > > > That was my initial design. "core" was calling into "spi" exclusively
> > > > via function pointers.
> > > > 
> > > > The request was "Please find a clearer way to do this without function
> > > > pointers"
> > > > 
> > > > https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/Ydwju35sN9QJqJ%2FP@google.com/
> > > 
> > > Yeah, I'm not sure what Lee was looking for, either. In any case I agree
> > > with the comment that you aren't configuring a bus. In this context it
> > > seems more appropriate to call this function pointer "init_regmap", with
> > > different implementations per transport.
> > 
> > FWIW, I'm still against using function pointers for this.
> > 
> > What about making ocelot_init_regmap_from_resource() an inline
> > function and pushing it into one of the header files?
> > 
> > [As an aside, you don't need to pass both dev (parent) and child]
> 
> I see your point. This wasn't always the case, since ocelot-core prior
> to v8 would call ocelot_spi_devm_init_regmap. Since this was changed,
> the "dev, dev" part can all be handled internally. That's nice.
> 
> > 
> > In there you could simply do:
> > 
> > inline struct regmap *ocelot_init_regmap_from_resource(struct device *dev,
> > 						       const struct resource *res)
> > {
> > 	if (dev_get_drvdata(dev->parent)->spi)
> > 		return ocelot_spi_devm_init_regmap(dev, res);
> > 
> > 	return NULL;
> > }
> 
> If I do this, won't I have to declare ocelot_spi_devm_init_regmap in a
> larger scope (include/soc/mscc/ocelot.h)? I like the idea of keeping it
> more hidden inside drivers/mfd/ocelot.h, assuming I can't keep it
> enclosed in drivers/mfd/ocelot-spi.c entirely.

Yes, it will have the same scope as ocelot_init_regmap_from_resource().

Have you considered include/linux/mfd?

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Principal Technical Lead - Developer Services
Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog