Re: [PATCH 5/6] platform/x86: int3472: Support multiple gpio lookups in board data

[Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>]

Hi,

On 2/16/22 23:53, Daniel Scally wrote:
> Currently, we only support passing a single gpiod_lookup_table as part
> of the board data for the tps68470 driver. This carries the implicit
> assumption that each TPS68470 device will only support a single
> sensor, which does not hold true.
> 
> Extend the code to support the possibility of multiple sensors each
> having a gpiod_lookup_table, and opportunistically add the lookup
> table for the Surface Go line's IR camera.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Scally <djrscally@gmail.com>
> ---
>  drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/tps68470.c | 18 ++++++++++-----
>  drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/tps68470.h |  3 ++-
>  .../x86/intel/int3472/tps68470_board_data.c   | 22 ++++++++++++++++---
>  3 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/tps68470.c b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/tps68470.c
> index b535564712bb..736480961ec3 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/tps68470.c
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/tps68470.c
> @@ -150,6 +150,7 @@ static int skl_int3472_tps68470_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
>  	struct regmap *regmap;
>  	int device_type;
>  	int ret;
> +	int i;
>  
>  	n_consumers = skl_int3472_fill_clk_pdata(&client->dev, &clk_pdata);
>  	if (n_consumers < 0)
> @@ -194,15 +195,18 @@ static int skl_int3472_tps68470_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
>  		cells[1].pdata_size = sizeof(struct tps68470_regulator_platform_data);
>  		cells[2].name = "tps68470-gpio";
>  
> -		gpiod_add_lookup_table(board_data->tps68470_gpio_lookup_table);
> +		for (i = 0; i < board_data->n_gpiod_lookups; i++)
> +			gpiod_add_lookup_table(board_data->tps68470_gpio_lookup_tables[i]);
>  
>  		ret = devm_mfd_add_devices(&client->dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_NONE,
>  					   cells, TPS68470_WIN_MFD_CELL_COUNT,
>  					   NULL, 0, NULL);
>  		kfree(cells);
>  
> -		if (ret)
> -			gpiod_remove_lookup_table(board_data->tps68470_gpio_lookup_table);
> +		if (ret) {
> +			for (i = 0; i < board_data->n_gpiod_lookups; i++)
> +				gpiod_remove_lookup_table(board_data->tps68470_gpio_lookup_tables[i]);
> +		}
>  
>  		break;
>  	case DESIGNED_FOR_CHROMEOS:
> @@ -226,10 +230,12 @@ static int skl_int3472_tps68470_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
>  static int skl_int3472_tps68470_remove(struct i2c_client *client)
>  {
>  	const struct int3472_tps68470_board_data *board_data;
> -
> +	int i;

Please keep an empty line between variable declarations and statements
(I believe checkpatch should have warned about this?)

>  	board_data = int3472_tps68470_get_board_data(dev_name(&client->dev));
> -	if (board_data)
> -		gpiod_remove_lookup_table(board_data->tps68470_gpio_lookup_table);
> +	if (board_data) {
> +		for (i = 0; i < board_data->n_gpiod_lookups; i++)
> +			gpiod_remove_lookup_table(board_data->tps68470_gpio_lookup_tables[i]);
> +	}
>  
>  	return 0;
>  }
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/tps68470.h b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/tps68470.h
> index cfd33eb62740..35915e701593 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/tps68470.h
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/tps68470.h
> @@ -16,8 +16,9 @@ struct tps68470_regulator_platform_data;
>  
>  struct int3472_tps68470_board_data {
>  	const char *dev_name;
> -	struct gpiod_lookup_table *tps68470_gpio_lookup_table;
>  	const struct tps68470_regulator_platform_data *tps68470_regulator_pdata;
> +	unsigned int n_gpiod_lookups;
> +	struct gpiod_lookup_table *tps68470_gpio_lookup_tables[];
>  };
>  
>  const struct int3472_tps68470_board_data *int3472_tps68470_get_board_data(const char *dev_name);
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/tps68470_board_data.c b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/tps68470_board_data.c
> index 525f09a3b5ff..442a8a2de224 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/tps68470_board_data.c
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/tps68470_board_data.c
> @@ -96,7 +96,7 @@ static const struct tps68470_regulator_platform_data surface_go_tps68470_pdata =
>  	},
>  };
>  
> -static struct gpiod_lookup_table surface_go_tps68470_gpios = {
> +static struct gpiod_lookup_table surface_go_int347a_gpios = {
>  	.dev_id = "i2c-INT347A:00",
>  	.table = {
>  		GPIO_LOOKUP("tps68470-gpio", 9, "reset", GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW),
> @@ -105,16 +105,32 @@ static struct gpiod_lookup_table surface_go_tps68470_gpios = {
>  	}
>  };
>  
> +static struct gpiod_lookup_table surface_go_int347e_gpios = {
> +	.dev_id = "i2c-INT347E:00",
> +	.table = {
> +		GPIO_LOOKUP("tps68470-gpio", 5, "enable", GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH),
> +		{ }
> +	}
> +};
> +
>  static const struct int3472_tps68470_board_data surface_go_tps68470_board_data = {
>  	.dev_name = "i2c-INT3472:05",
> -	.tps68470_gpio_lookup_table = &surface_go_tps68470_gpios,
>  	.tps68470_regulator_pdata = &surface_go_tps68470_pdata,
> +	.n_gpiod_lookups = 2,
> +	.tps68470_gpio_lookup_tables = {
> +		&surface_go_int347a_gpios,
> +		&surface_go_int347e_gpios,
> +	}
>  };
>  
>  static const struct int3472_tps68470_board_data surface_go3_tps68470_board_data = {
>  	.dev_name = "i2c-INT3472:01",
> -	.tps68470_gpio_lookup_table = &surface_go_tps68470_gpios,
>  	.tps68470_regulator_pdata = &surface_go_tps68470_pdata,
> +	.n_gpiod_lookups = 2,
> +	.tps68470_gpio_lookup_tables = {
> +		&surface_go_int347a_gpios,
> +		&surface_go_int347e_gpios,
> +	}
>  };
>  
>  static const struct dmi_system_id int3472_tps68470_board_data_table[] = {

Otherwise this looks good to me:

Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>

Regards,

Hans