From: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
To: Peter Rosin <peda@axentia.se>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@gmx.de>,
Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@pmeerw.net>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 05/12] mux: support simplified bindings for single-user gpio mux
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 21:22:02 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b7f15637-cba9-3d4a-190d-812771a85a86@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <60cd24a4-dd13-c5e8-c06d-bbd12a8e7e21@axentia.se>
On 08/01/17 21:56, Peter Rosin wrote:
> On 2017-01-08 11:28, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>> On 05/01/17 16:21, Peter Rosin wrote:
>>> On 2017-01-04 13:16, Peter Rosin wrote:
>>>> Signed-off-by: Peter Rosin <peda@axentia.se>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/mux/mux-core.c | 81 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>>> drivers/mux/mux-gpio.c | 56 ++--------------------------------
>>>> include/linux/mux.h | 7 +++++
>>>> 3 files changed, 89 insertions(+), 55 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mux/mux-core.c b/drivers/mux/mux-core.c
>>>> index 21da15a264ad..d887ae1c0e55 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/mux/mux-core.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/mux/mux-core.c
>>>> @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@
>>>> #include <linux/device.h>
>>>> #include <linux/err.h>
>>>> #include <linux/idr.h>
>>>> +#include <linux/gpio/consumer.h>
>>>> #include <linux/module.h>
>>>> #include <linux/mux.h>
>>>> #include <linux/of.h>
>>>> @@ -288,6 +289,63 @@ static struct mux_chip *of_find_mux_chip_by_node(struct device_node *np)
>>>> return dev ? to_mux_chip(dev) : NULL;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_MUX_GPIO
>>>> +
>>>> +static int mux_gpio_set(struct mux_control *mux, int state)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct mux_gpio *mux_gpio = mux_chip_priv(mux->chip);
>>>> + int i;
>>>> +
>>>> + for (i = 0; i < mux_gpio->gpios->ndescs; i++)
>>>> + mux_gpio->val[i] = (state >> i) & 1;
>>>> +
>>>> + gpiod_set_array_value_cansleep(mux_gpio->gpios->ndescs,
>>>> + mux_gpio->gpios->desc,
>>>> + mux_gpio->val);
>>>> +
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static const struct mux_control_ops mux_gpio_ops = {
>>>> + .set = mux_gpio_set,
>>>> +};
>>>> +
>>>> +struct mux_chip *mux_gpio_alloc(struct device *dev)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct mux_chip *mux_chip;
>>>> + struct mux_gpio *mux_gpio;
>>>> + int pins;
>>>> + int ret;
>>>> +
>>>> + pins = gpiod_count(dev, "mux");
>>>> + if (pins < 0)
>>>> + return ERR_PTR(pins);
>>>> +
>>>> + mux_chip = devm_mux_chip_alloc(dev, 1, sizeof(*mux_gpio) +
>>>> + pins * sizeof(*mux_gpio->val));
>>>> + if (!mux_chip)
>>>> + return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
>>>> +
>>>> + mux_gpio = mux_chip_priv(mux_chip);
>>>> + mux_gpio->val = (int *)(mux_gpio + 1);
>>>> + mux_chip->ops = &mux_gpio_ops;
>>>> +
>>>> + mux_gpio->gpios = devm_gpiod_get_array(dev, "mux", GPIOD_OUT_LOW);
>>>> + if (IS_ERR(mux_gpio->gpios)) {
>>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(mux_gpio->gpios);
>>>> + if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER)
>>>> + dev_err(dev, "failed to get gpios\n");
>>>> + return ERR_PTR(ret);
>>>> + }
>>>> + WARN_ON(pins != mux_gpio->gpios->ndescs);
>>>> + mux_chip->mux->states = 1 << pins;
>>>> +
>>>> + return mux_chip;
>>>> +}
>>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mux_gpio_alloc);
>>>> +
>>>> +#endif /* CONFIG_MUX_GPIO */
>>>> +
>>>> struct mux_control *mux_control_get(struct device *dev, const char *mux_name)
>>>> {
>>>> struct device_node *np = dev->of_node;
>>>> @@ -307,9 +365,28 @@ struct mux_control *mux_control_get(struct device *dev, const char *mux_name)
>>>> ret = of_parse_phandle_with_args(np,
>>>> "mux-controls", "#mux-control-cells",
>>>> index, &args);
>>>> +
>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_MUX_GPIO
>>>> + if (ret == -ENOENT && !mux_name && gpiod_count(dev, "mux") > 0) {
>>>> + mux_chip = mux_gpio_alloc(dev);
>>>> + if (!IS_ERR(mux_chip)) {
>>>> + ret = devm_mux_chip_register(dev, mux_chip);
>>>> + if (ret < 0) {
>>>> + dev_err(dev, "failed to register mux-chip\n");
>>>> + return ERR_PTR(ret);
>>>> + }
>>>> + get_device(&mux_chip->dev);
>>>> + return mux_chip->mux;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(mux_chip);
>>>> + }
>>>> +#endif
>>>> +
>>>> if (ret) {
>>>> - dev_err(dev, "%s: failed to get mux-control %s(%i)\n",
>>>> - np->full_name, mux_name ?: "", index);
>>>> + if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER)
>>>> + dev_err(dev, "%s: failed to get mux-control %s(%i)\n",
>>>> + np->full_name, mux_name ?: "", index);
>>>> return ERR_PTR(ret);
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mux/mux-gpio.c b/drivers/mux/mux-gpio.c
>>>> index 76b52bc63470..8a7bfbc0c4bb 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/mux/mux-gpio.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/mux/mux-gpio.c
>>>> @@ -11,37 +11,12 @@
>>>> */
>>>>
>>>> #include <linux/err.h>
>>>> -#include <linux/gpio/consumer.h>
>>>> #include <linux/module.h>
>>>> #include <linux/mux.h>
>>>> #include <linux/of_platform.h>
>>>> #include <linux/platform_device.h>
>>>> #include <linux/property.h>
>>>
>>> Instead of moving the mux-gpio guts from mux-gpio.c to mux-core.c, I
>>> will instead make CONFIG_MUX_GPIO a bool option (no module possible)
>>> and call it from the mux-core. That will be cleaner and less of a
>>> break of abstractions in my opinion.
>> Hmm. I wonder if the balance is right here or whether we should just not have the
>> simplified binding at all as it breaks the assumption that all muxes are of the
>> same level...
>>
>> I like the binding, but it is causing significant complexity in here.
>
> Yes, in this patch it looks pretty bad. But with the suggested
> changes it at least looks fine (apart from the remaining ifdef
> in mux_control_get). But then there's of course the conceptual
> badness of the core depending on a specific driver that you
> mention...
>
> But. I expect that gpio based muxes will be in vast majority, and
> giving them some extra freedoms is probably not wrong considering
> the upside of the simpler binding.
>
Difficult balance. As you are going to be the poor soul who has
to maintain this I'm not that bothered either way ;)
Probably worth gathering a few more opinions on this though if
they are forthcoming.
Jonathan
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Peter
>>>
>>>> -struct mux_gpio {
>>>> - struct gpio_descs *gpios;
>>>> - int *val;
>>>> -};
>>>> -
>>>> -static int mux_gpio_set(struct mux_control *mux, int state)
>>>> -{
>>>> - struct mux_gpio *mux_gpio = mux_chip_priv(mux->chip);
>>>> - int i;
>>>> -
>>>> - for (i = 0; i < mux_gpio->gpios->ndescs; i++)
>>>> - mux_gpio->val[i] = (state >> i) & 1;
>>>> -
>>>> - gpiod_set_array_value_cansleep(mux_gpio->gpios->ndescs,
>>>> - mux_gpio->gpios->desc,
>>>> - mux_gpio->val);
>>>> -
>>>> - return 0;
>>>> -}
>>>> -
>>>> -static const struct mux_control_ops mux_gpio_ops = {
>>>> - .set = mux_gpio_set,
>>>> -};
>>>> -
>>>> static const struct of_device_id mux_gpio_dt_ids[] = {
>>>> { .compatible = "mux-gpio", },
>>>> { /* sentinel */ }
>>>> @@ -51,38 +26,13 @@ MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, mux_gpio_dt_ids);
>>>> static int mux_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>> {
>>>> struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
>>>> - struct device_node *np = dev->of_node;
>>>> struct mux_chip *mux_chip;
>>>> - struct mux_gpio *mux_gpio;
>>>> - int pins;
>>>> u32 idle_state;
>>>> int ret;
>>>>
>>>> - if (!np)
>>>> - return -ENODEV;
>>>> -
>>>> - pins = gpiod_count(dev, "mux");
>>>> - if (pins < 0)
>>>> - return pins;
>>>> -
>>>> - mux_chip = devm_mux_chip_alloc(dev, 1, sizeof(*mux_gpio) +
>>>> - pins * sizeof(*mux_gpio->val));
>>>> - if (!mux_chip)
>>>> - return -ENOMEM;
>>>> -
>>>> - mux_gpio = mux_chip_priv(mux_chip);
>>>> - mux_gpio->val = (int *)(mux_gpio + 1);
>>>> - mux_chip->ops = &mux_gpio_ops;
>>>> -
>>>> - mux_gpio->gpios = devm_gpiod_get_array(dev, "mux", GPIOD_OUT_LOW);
>>>> - if (IS_ERR(mux_gpio->gpios)) {
>>>> - ret = PTR_ERR(mux_gpio->gpios);
>>>> - if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER)
>>>> - dev_err(dev, "failed to get gpios\n");
>>>> - return ret;
>>>> - }
>>>> - WARN_ON(pins != mux_gpio->gpios->ndescs);
>>>> - mux_chip->mux->states = 1 << pins;
>>>> + mux_chip = mux_gpio_alloc(dev);
>>>> + if (IS_ERR(mux_chip))
>>>> + return PTR_ERR(mux_chip);
>>>>
>>>> ret = device_property_read_u32(dev, "idle-state", &idle_state);
>>>> if (ret >= 0) {
>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/mux.h b/include/linux/mux.h
>>>> index 3b9439927f11..3bfee23cfb8c 100644
>>>> --- a/include/linux/mux.h
>>>> +++ b/include/linux/mux.h
>>>> @@ -241,4 +241,11 @@ struct mux_control *devm_mux_control_get(struct device *dev,
>>>> */
>>>> void devm_mux_control_put(struct device *dev, struct mux_control *mux);
>>>>
>>>> +struct mux_gpio {
>>>> + struct gpio_descs *gpios;
>>>> + int *val;
>>>> +};
>>>> +
>>>> +struct mux_chip *mux_gpio_alloc(struct device *dev);
>>>> +
>>>> #endif /* _LINUX_MUX_H */
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-10 21:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-04 12:16 [PATCH v7 00/12] mux controller abstraction and iio/i2c muxes Peter Rosin
2017-01-04 12:16 ` [PATCH v7 02/12] dt-bindings: document devicetree bindings for mux-controllers and mux-gpio Peter Rosin
[not found] ` <1483532187-28494-1-git-send-email-peda-koto5C5qi+TLoDKTGw+V6w@public.gmane.org>
2017-01-04 12:16 ` [PATCH v7 01/12] devres: trivial whitespace fix Peter Rosin
[not found] ` <1483532187-28494-2-git-send-email-peda-koto5C5qi+TLoDKTGw+V6w@public.gmane.org>
2017-01-07 22:29 ` Jonathan Cameron
2017-01-04 12:16 ` [PATCH v7 03/12] mux: minimal mux subsystem and gpio-based mux controller Peter Rosin
[not found] ` <1483532187-28494-4-git-send-email-peda-koto5C5qi+TLoDKTGw+V6w@public.gmane.org>
2017-01-08 10:23 ` Jonathan Cameron
2017-01-08 21:55 ` Peter Rosin
2017-01-04 12:16 ` [PATCH v7 10/12] i2c: i2c-mux-simple: new driver Peter Rosin
2017-01-08 10:44 ` Wolfram Sang
2017-01-04 12:16 ` [PATCH v7 04/12] dt-bindings: simplified bindings for single-user gpio mux Peter Rosin
2017-01-08 10:25 ` Jonathan Cameron
2017-01-04 12:16 ` [PATCH v7 05/12] mux: support " Peter Rosin
[not found] ` <1483532187-28494-6-git-send-email-peda-koto5C5qi+TLoDKTGw+V6w@public.gmane.org>
2017-01-05 16:21 ` Peter Rosin
2017-01-08 10:28 ` Jonathan Cameron
2017-01-08 21:56 ` Peter Rosin
2017-01-10 21:22 ` Jonathan Cameron [this message]
2017-01-04 12:16 ` [PATCH v7 06/12] iio: inkern: api for manipulating ext_info of iio channels Peter Rosin
2017-01-04 12:16 ` [PATCH v7 07/12] dt-bindings: iio: iio-mux: document iio-mux bindings Peter Rosin
[not found] ` <1483532187-28494-8-git-send-email-peda-koto5C5qi+TLoDKTGw+V6w@public.gmane.org>
2017-01-08 10:29 ` Jonathan Cameron
2017-01-04 12:16 ` [PATCH v7 08/12] iio: multiplexer: new iio category and iio-mux driver Peter Rosin
2017-01-04 12:16 ` [PATCH v7 09/12] dt-bindings: i2c: i2c-mux-simple: document i2c-mux-simple bindings Peter Rosin
2017-01-07 22:28 ` Jonathan Cameron
2017-01-04 12:16 ` [PATCH v7 11/12] dt-bindings: mux-adg792a: document devicetree bindings for ADG792A/G mux Peter Rosin
2017-01-08 10:31 ` Jonathan Cameron
2017-01-04 12:16 ` [PATCH v7 12/12] mux: adg792a: add mux controller driver for ADG792A/G Peter Rosin
2017-01-08 10:32 ` Jonathan Cameron
2017-01-08 10:51 ` [PATCH v7 00/12] mux controller abstraction and iio/i2c muxes Wolfram Sang
2017-01-08 21:56 ` Peter Rosin
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=b7f15637-cba9-3d4a-190d-812771a85a86@kernel.org \
--to=jic23@kernel.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=knaack.h@gmx.de \
--cc=lars@metafoo.de \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=peda@axentia.se \
--cc=pmeerw@pmeerw.net \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=wsa@the-dreams.de \
/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).