Re: [PATCH v11 net-next 1/9] mfd: ocelot: add helper to get regmap from a resource

Vladimir Oltean
2022-06-29T23:09:27Z

On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 01:39:05PM -0700, Colin Foster wrote:
> I liked the idea of the MFD being "code complete" so if future regmaps
> were needed for the felix dsa driver came about, it wouldn't require
> changes to the "parent." But I think that was a bad goal - especially
> since MFD requires all the resources anyway.
>
> Also at the time, I was trying a hybrid "create it if it doesn't exist,
> return it if was already created" approach. I backed that out after an
> RFC.
>
> Focusing only on the non-felix drivers: it seems trivial for the parent
> to create _all_ the possible child regmaps, register them to the parent
> via by way of regmap_attach_dev().
>
> At that point, changing things like drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ocelot.c to
> initalize like (untested, and apologies for indentation):
>
> regs = devm_platform_get_and_ioremap_resource(pdev, 0, &res);
> if (IS_ERR(regs)) {
> map = dev_get_regmap(dev->parent, name);
> } else {
> map = devm_regmap_init_mmio(dev, regs, config);
> }

Again, those dev_err(dev, "invalid resource\n"); prints you were
complaining about earlier are self-inflicted IMO, and caused exactly by
this pattern. I get why you prefer to call larger building blocks if
possible, but in this case, devm_platform_get_and_ioremap_resource()
calls exactly 2 sub-functions: platform_get_resource() and
devm_ioremap_resource(). The IS_ERR() that you check for is caused by
devm_ioremap_resource() being passed a NULL pointer, and same goes for
the print. Just call them individually, and put your dev_get_regmap()
hook in case platform_get_resource() returns NULL, rather than passing
NULL to devm_ioremap_resource() and waiting for that to fail.

> In that case, "name" would either be hard-coded to match what is in
> drivers/mfd/ocelot-core.c. The other option is to fall back to
> platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_REG, 0), and pass in
> resource->name. I'll be able to deal with that when I try it. (hopefully
> this evening)

I'm not exactly clear on what you'd do with the REG resource once you
get it. Assuming you'd get access to the "reg = <0x71070034 0x6c>;"
from the device tree, what next, who's going to set up the SPI regmap
for you?

> This seems to be a solid design that I missed! As you mention, it'll
> require changes to felix dsa... but not as much as I had feared. And I
> think it solves all my fears about modules to boot. This seems too good
> to be true - but maybe I was too deep and needed to take this step back.