From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To: Chen-Yu Tsai <wenst@chromium.org>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
Saravana Kannan <saravanak@google.com>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
<angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@kernel.org>, Benson Leung <bleung@chromium.org>,
Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@kernel.org>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
chrome-platform@lists.linux.dev, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>,
Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>, Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org>,
linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 08/10] i2c: of-prober: Add GPIO support
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2024 17:20:41 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZsdJOUe44hiGur-s@smile.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240822092006.3134096-9-wenst@chromium.org>
On Thu, Aug 22, 2024 at 05:20:01PM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote:
> This adds GPIO management to the I2C OF component prober.
> Components that the prober intends to probe likely require their
> regulator supplies be enabled, and GPIOs be toggled to enable them or
> bring them out of reset before they will respond to probe attempts.
> regulator support was added in the previous patch.
>
> Without specific knowledge of each component's resource names or
> power sequencing requirements, the prober can only enable the
> regulator supplies all at once, and toggle the GPIOs all at once.
> Luckily, reset pins tend to be active low, while enable pins tend to
> be active high, so setting the raw status of all GPIO pins to high
> should work. The wait time before and after resources are enabled
> are collected from existing drivers and device trees.
>
> The prober collects resources from all possible components and enables
> them together, instead of enabling resources and probing each component
> one by one. The latter approach does not provide any boot time benefits
> over simply enabling each component and letting each driver probe
> sequentially.
>
> The prober will also deduplicate the resources, since on a component
> swap out or co-layout design, the resources are always the same.
> While duplicate regulator supplies won't cause much issue, shared
> GPIOs don't work reliably, especially with other drivers. For the
> same reason, the prober will release the GPIOs before the successfully
> probed component is actually enabled.
...
> + struct fwnode_handle *fwnode = of_fwnode_handle(node);
> + struct gpio_descs *gpiods;
> + struct gpio_desc *gpiod;
> + char con[32]; /* 32 is max size of property name */
Use 'propname' to be aligned with GPIO library usages.
> + char *con_id = NULL;
> + size_t new_size;
> + int len;
...
> + if (len >= sizeof(con) - 1) {
This can be transformed to check the returned value from strscpy().
> + pr_err("%pOF: length of GPIO name \"%s\" exceeds current limit\n",
> + node, prop->name);
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + if (len > 0) {
> + strscpy(con, prop->name, len + 1);
The correct (robust) call is with destination size. Which means here that you
may use 2-argument strscpy().
> + con_id = con;
> + }
...
> + if (!data->gpiods)
> + return 0;
If it comes a new code (something else besides GPIOs and regulators) this will be a (small) impediment. Better to have a helper for each case and do
ret = ..._gpiods();
if (ret)
...
Same for regulators and anything else in the future, if any.
> + /*
> + * reset GPIOs normally have opposite polarity compared to
"reset"
> + * enable GPIOs. Instead of parsing the flags again, simply
"enable"
> + * set the raw value to high.
This is quite a fragile assumption. Yes, it would work in 98% cases, but will
break if it's not true somewhere else.
> + */
...
> + /* largest post-reset-deassert delay seen in tree for Elan I2C HID */
> + msleep(300);
Same Q, how do you monitor _all_ the drivers?
...
> +disable_gpios:
> + for (gpio_i--; gpio_i >= 0; gpio_i--)
> + gpiod_set_raw_value_cansleep(data->gpiods->desc[gpio_i], 0);
Can't you call the _array() variant here?
...
> - dev_dbg(dev, "Resources: # of regulator supplies = %d\n", probe_data.regulators_num);
> + dev_dbg(dev, "Resources: # of GPIOs = %d, # of regulator supplies = %d\n",
> + probe_data.gpiods ? probe_data.gpiods->ndescs : 0,
> + probe_data.regulators_num);
I would issue one message per class of the devices (GPIOs, regulators, ...)
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-08-22 14:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-08-22 9:19 [PATCH v5 00/10] platform/chrome: Introduce DT hardware prober Chen-Yu Tsai
2024-08-22 9:19 ` [PATCH v5 01/10] of: dynamic: Add of_changeset_update_prop_string Chen-Yu Tsai
2024-08-22 12:32 ` Rob Herring
2024-08-22 9:19 ` [PATCH v5 02/10] regulator: Move OF-specific regulator lookup code to of_regulator.c Chen-Yu Tsai
2024-08-22 13:47 ` Andy Shevchenko
2024-08-23 6:49 ` Chen-Yu Tsai
2024-08-23 13:43 ` Andy Shevchenko
2024-08-26 6:46 ` Chen-Yu Tsai
2024-08-26 12:06 ` kernel test robot
2024-08-26 12:06 ` kernel test robot
2024-08-26 13:19 ` kernel test robot
2024-08-22 9:19 ` [PATCH v5 03/10] regulator: Split up _regulator_get() Chen-Yu Tsai
2024-08-22 13:49 ` Andy Shevchenko
2024-08-23 6:54 ` Chen-Yu Tsai
2024-08-22 9:19 ` [PATCH v5 04/10] regulator: Do pure DT regulator lookup in of_regulator_bulk_get_all() Chen-Yu Tsai
2024-08-22 13:53 ` Andy Shevchenko
2024-08-23 7:05 ` Chen-Yu Tsai
2024-08-22 9:19 ` [PATCH v5 05/10] gpiolib: Add gpio_property_name_length() Chen-Yu Tsai
2024-08-22 14:36 ` Andy Shevchenko
2024-08-23 7:50 ` Chen-Yu Tsai
2024-08-23 13:46 ` Andy Shevchenko
2024-08-22 9:19 ` [PATCH v5 06/10] i2c: Introduce OF component probe function Chen-Yu Tsai
2024-08-22 14:01 ` Andy Shevchenko
2024-08-23 8:40 ` Chen-Yu Tsai
2024-08-23 13:52 ` Andy Shevchenko
2024-08-22 9:20 ` [PATCH v5 07/10] i2c: of-prober: Add regulator support Chen-Yu Tsai
2024-08-22 14:09 ` Andy Shevchenko
2024-08-23 9:35 ` Chen-Yu Tsai
2024-08-23 13:56 ` Andy Shevchenko
2024-08-22 9:20 ` [PATCH v5 08/10] i2c: of-prober: Add GPIO support Chen-Yu Tsai
2024-08-22 14:20 ` Andy Shevchenko [this message]
2024-08-23 10:32 ` Chen-Yu Tsai
2024-08-23 14:00 ` Andy Shevchenko
2024-08-26 7:21 ` Chen-Yu Tsai
2024-08-22 9:20 ` [PATCH v5 09/10] platform/chrome: Introduce device tree hardware prober Chen-Yu Tsai
2024-08-22 9:20 ` [PATCH v5 10/10] arm64: dts: mediatek: mt8173-elm-hana: Mark touchscreens and trackpads as fail Chen-Yu Tsai
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ZsdJOUe44hiGur-s@smile.fi.intel.com \
--to=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com \
--cc=bleung@chromium.org \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=chrome-platform@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dianders@chromium.org \
--cc=jikos@kernel.org \
--cc=johan@kernel.org \
--cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=matthias.bgg@gmail.com \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=saravanak@google.com \
--cc=tzungbi@kernel.org \
--cc=wenst@chromium.org \
--cc=wsa@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).