From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: j-keerthy@ti.com (Keerthy)
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2017 10:02:15 +0530
Subject: [PATCH v3 8/9] pwm: pwm-omap-dmtimer: Adapt driver to utilize
 dmtimer pdata ops
In-Reply-To: <7bfa0a0d-27f6-3797-f96b-eeb975158f78@ti.com>
References: <1510806222-22096-1-git-send-email-j-keerthy@ti.com>
 <1510806222-22096-9-git-send-email-j-keerthy@ti.com>
 <2c5e3e04-9940-43c3-62b1-8cef7d22c5e1@ti.com>
 <e632a727-1067-7767-1646-f49ec0f8c2ec@ti.com>
 <7bfa0a0d-27f6-3797-f96b-eeb975158f78@ti.com>
Message-ID: <46717199-3db8-923c-0c66-0d25f5fd871e@ti.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org



On Friday 01 December 2017 04:49 AM, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
> 
> 
> On 11/30/2017 03:36 AM, Keerthy wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Tuesday 28 November 2017 11:57 PM, Strashko, Grygorii wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11/15/2017 10:23 PM, Keerthy wrote:
>>>> Adapt driver to utilize dmtimer pdata ops instead of pdata-quirks.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Keerthy <j-keerthy@ti.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> Changes in v3:
>>>>
>>>> ??? * Used of_find_platdata_by_node function to fetch platform
>>>> ????? data for timer node.
>>>>
>>>> ?? drivers/pwm/pwm-omap-dmtimer.c | 39
>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
>>>> ?? 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-omap-dmtimer.c
>>>> b/drivers/pwm/pwm-omap-dmtimer.c
>>>> index 5ad42f3..2caf46b 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-omap-dmtimer.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-omap-dmtimer.c
>>>> @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@
>>>> ?? #include <linux/mutex.h>
>>>> ?? #include <linux/of.h>
>>>> ?? #include <linux/of_platform.h>
>>>> +#include <linux/platform_data/dmtimer-omap.h>
>>>> ?? #include <linux/platform_data/pwm_omap_dmtimer.h>
>>>> ?? #include <linux/platform_device.h>
>>>> ?? #include <linux/pm_runtime.h>
>>>> @@ -37,7 +38,7 @@ struct pwm_omap_dmtimer_chip {
>>>> ?????? struct pwm_chip chip;
>>>> ?????? struct mutex mutex;
>>>> ?????? pwm_omap_dmtimer *dm_timer;
>>>> -??? struct pwm_omap_dmtimer_pdata *pdata;
>>>> +??? struct omap_dm_timer_ops *pdata;
>>>> ?????? struct platform_device *dm_timer_pdev;
>>>> ?? };
>>>> ?? @@ -242,19 +243,33 @@ static int pwm_omap_dmtimer_probe(struct
>>>> platform_device *pdev)
>>>> ?? {
>>>> ?????? struct device_node *np = pdev->dev.of_node;
>>>> ?????? struct device_node *timer;
>>>> +??? struct platform_device *timer_pdev;
>>>> ?????? struct pwm_omap_dmtimer_chip *omap;
>>>> -??? struct pwm_omap_dmtimer_pdata *pdata;
>>>> +??? struct dmtimer_platform_data *timer_pdata;
>>>> +??? struct omap_dm_timer_ops *pdata;
>>>> ?????? pwm_omap_dmtimer *dm_timer;
>>>> ?????? u32 v;
>>>> ?????? int status;
>>>> ?? -??? pdata = dev_get_platdata(&pdev->dev);
>>>> -??? if (!pdata) {
>>>> -??????? dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Missing dmtimer platform data\n");
>>>> +??? timer = of_parse_phandle(np, "ti,timers", 0);
>>>> +??? if (!timer)
>>>> +??????? return -ENODEV;
>>>> +
>>>> +??? timer_pdev = of_find_device_by_node(timer);
>>>> +??? if (!timer_pdev) {
>>>> +??????? dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Unable to find Timer pdev\n");
>>>> +??????? return -ENODEV;
>>>> +??? }
>>>> +
>>>> +??? timer_pdata = of_find_platdata_by_node(timer);
>>>> +??? if (!timer_pdata) {
>>>> +??????? dev_err(&pdev->dev, "dmtimer pdata structure NULL\n");
>>>> ?????????? return -EINVAL;
>>>> ?????? }
>>>
>>> Huh. I think It might be better if you add smth. like
>>>
>>> struct omap_dm_timer *dm_timer = of_omap_dm_timer_get(parent_np,
>>> "ti,timers", idx);
>>>
>>> struct omap_dm_timer_ops *pdata = omap_dm_timer_get_ops(dm_timer);
>>>
>>> so all DT and platdata implementation details will be hidden.
>>
>> Grygorii,
>>
>> This driver is already fetching:
>>
>> omap->dm_timer_pdev = of_find_device_by_node(timer);
>>
>> It stores dm_timer_pdev in struct pwm_omap_dmtimer_chip.
>> So we already need:
>> timer = of_parse_phandle(np, "ti,timers", 0);
>> and
>> omap->dm_timer_pdev = of_find_device_by_node(timer);
>>
>> So why not just do:
>>
>> struct omap_dm_timer_ops *pdata =
>> omap_dm_timer_get_ops(omap->dm_timer_pdev);
> 
> if you dont want to do additional optimizations as part of migration
> might be
> dev_get_platdata(&omap->dm_timer_pdev->dev);
> 
> would be enough.

That is pretty much what i want to do with the migration series.

> 
> But, again, PWM driver don't need to know so many details about
> DM timer implementation and internal structure as consumer.

Totally understand that. I will follow up with more clean ups once the
code is migrated. Hope that is a reasonable approach.

>