Re: N800 problems with MMC, LM8323 on current linux-omap git head

Re: N800 problems with MMC, LM8323 on current linux-omap git head

[Riku Voipio]

On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 07:52:44AM -0500, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 15:47:43 +0300, Riku Voipio <riku.voipio@iki.fi> wrote:
> 
> > Hmm. I think it would be better to avoid calling the probe
> > in first place. git diff made the attached patch look more
> > confusing than it actually is. Personally I'd eliminate
> > all ifdefs from those i2c_board_info structs.

> I did the same thing before, but then we're gonna start adding
> several i2c_board_info for different hw. I mean, we should
> just reuse the code and the driver should know when the device
> is not present and stop probing without any problems to the rest
> of the system.

If the different hw has different devices on the i2c bus, then
different i2c_board_info struct should be provided. IIRC i2c_board_info
is expected to provide a accurate picture of what i2c devices is
connected to the bus. This has been used as a argument to remove detection
code from .probe functions.

To all the confused i2c list readers, the topic is about should we
split n800_i2c_board_info_2 [0] to n800 and n810 specific structs[1]
or make the lm8323 configure to err out earlier[2].

[0] http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/tmlind/linux-omap-2.6.git;a=blob;f=arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-n800.c;h=ae85c2c60534820856c8bb0e019be29f2375470b;hb=HEAD#l645
[1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.omap/9562
[2] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.omap/9522


"rm -rf" only sounds scary if you don't have backups

Re: [i2c] N800 problems with MMC, LM8323 on current linux-omap git head

[Ben Dooks]

On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 04:37:42PM +0300, Riku Voipio wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 07:52:44AM -0500, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> > On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 15:47:43 +0300, Riku Voipio <riku.voipio@iki.fi> wrote:
> > 
> > > Hmm. I think it would be better to avoid calling the probe
> > > in first place. git diff made the attached patch look more
> > > confusing than it actually is. Personally I'd eliminate
> > > all ifdefs from those i2c_board_info structs.
> 
> > I did the same thing before, but then we're gonna start adding
> > several i2c_board_info for different hw. I mean, we should
> > just reuse the code and the driver should know when the device
> > is not present and stop probing without any problems to the rest
> > of the system.
> 
> If the different hw has different devices on the i2c bus, then
> different i2c_board_info struct should be provided. IIRC i2c_board_info
> is expected to provide a accurate picture of what i2c devices is
> connected to the bus. This has been used as a argument to remove detection
> code from .probe functions.
> 
> To all the confused i2c list readers, the topic is about should we
> split n800_i2c_board_info_2 [0] to n800 and n810 specific structs[1]
> or make the lm8323 configure to err out earlier[2].

Split them into a common and then machine specfic structures, you are
allowed to register more than one board per bus.
 
> [0] http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/tmlind/linux-omap-2.6.git;a=blob;f=arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-n800.c;h=ae85c2c60534820856c8bb0e019be29f2375470b;hb=HEAD#l645
> [1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.omap/9562
> [2] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.omap/9522
> 
> 
> "rm -rf" only sounds scary if you don't have backups
> 
> _______________________________________________
> i2c mailing list
> i2c@lm-sensors.org
> http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/i2c

-- 
Ben (ben@fluff.org, http://www.fluff.org/)

  'a smiley only costs 4 bytes'

Re: [i2c] N800 problems with MMC, LM8323 on current linux-omap git head

[Felipe Balbi]

Hi,

On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:43:14 +0100, Ben Dooks <ben-linux@fluff.org> wrote:
> Split them into a common and then machine specfic structures, you are
> allowed to register more than one board per bus.

Good to know :-)

Riku, could you update your patch then ?

but it anyways doesn't annul the need of a better error handling
in lm8323. I think both patches will need to be applied :-)

-- 
Best Regards,

Felipe Balbi
http://blog.felipebalbi.com
me@felipebalbi.com

Re: [i2c] N800 problems with MMC, LM8323 on current linux-omap git head

[Riku Voipio]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 839 bytes --]

On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 09:20:46AM -0500, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:43:14 +0100, Ben Dooks <ben-linux@fluff.org> wrote:
> > Split them into a common and then machine specfic structures, you are
> > allowed to register more than one board per bus.

> Good to know :-)

Indeed - compared to my previous version, this one makes the boardfile
even smaller:

   text    data     bss     dec     hex filename
   2362    1552       4    3918     f4e old/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-n800.o
   2354    1456       4    3814     ee6 new/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-n800.o


> Riku, could you update your patch then ?

tested and attached.

> but it anyways doesn't annul the need of a better error handling
> in lm8323. I think both patches will need to be applied :-)

true. 

-- 
"rm -rf" only sounds scary if you don't have backups

[-- Attachment #2: 0001-Separate-i2c_board_info-for-n800-and-n810.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 2690 bytes --]

>From 1e9d7271505e85c99fe9b46653569ff6216e07b3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Riku Voipio <riku.voipio@iki.fi>
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 12:29:31 +0300
Subject: [PATCH] Separate i2c_board_info for n800 and n810

n800 and n810 have different peripherals on the second i2c bus
(tea5761 on n800 and lm8323 on n810). Split the i2c_board_info to
common and hw specific to avoid probing nonexistent devices.

Signed-off-by: Riku Voipio <riku.voipio@iki.fi>
---
 arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-n800.c |   36 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
 1 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-n800.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-n800.c
index ae85c2c..e156dbd 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-n800.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-n800.c
@@ -642,30 +642,31 @@ static struct i2c_board_info __initdata n800_i2c_board_info_1[] = {
 
 extern struct tcm825x_platform_data n800_tcm825x_platform_data;
 
-static struct i2c_board_info __initdata_or_module n800_i2c_board_info_2[] = {
-#if defined (CONFIG_VIDEO_TCM825X) || defined (CONFIG_VIDEO_TCM825X_MODULE)
+static struct i2c_board_info __initdata_or_module n8x0_i2c_board_info_2[] = {
 	{
 		I2C_BOARD_INFO(TCM825X_NAME, TCM825X_I2C_ADDR),
 		.platform_data = &n800_tcm825x_platform_data,
 	},
-#endif
-#if defined(CONFIG_RADIO_TEA5761) || defined(CONFIG_RADIO_TEA5761_MODULE)
 	{
-		I2C_BOARD_INFO("tea5761", 0x10),
+		I2C_BOARD_INFO("tsl2563", 0x29),
 	},
-#endif
-#ifdef CONFIG_MACH_NOKIA_N810
 	{
-		I2C_BOARD_INFO("lm8323", 0x45),
-		.irq		= OMAP_GPIO_IRQ(109),
-		.platform_data	= &lm8323_pdata,
+		I2C_BOARD_INFO("lp5521", 0x32),
 	},
-#endif
+};
+
+
+static struct i2c_board_info __initdata_or_module n800_i2c_board_info_2[] = {
 	{
-		I2C_BOARD_INFO("tsl2563", 0x29),
+		I2C_BOARD_INFO("tea5761", 0x10),
 	},
+};
+
+static struct i2c_board_info __initdata_or_module n810_i2c_board_info_2[] = {
 	{
-		I2C_BOARD_INFO("lp5521", 0x32),
+		I2C_BOARD_INFO("lm8323", 0x45),
+		.irq		= OMAP_GPIO_IRQ(109),
+		.platform_data	= &lm8323_pdata,
 	},
 };
 
@@ -690,8 +691,15 @@ void __init nokia_n800_common_init(void)
 	omap_serial_init();
 	omap_register_i2c_bus(1, 400, n800_i2c_board_info_1,
 			      ARRAY_SIZE(n800_i2c_board_info_1));
-	omap_register_i2c_bus(2, 400, n800_i2c_board_info_2,
+	omap_register_i2c_bus(2, 400, n8x0_i2c_board_info_2,
 			      ARRAY_SIZE(n800_i2c_board_info_2));
+	if (machine_is_nokia_n800())
+		i2c_register_board_info(2, n800_i2c_board_info_2,
+			ARRAY_SIZE(n800_i2c_board_info_2));
+	if (machine_is_nokia_n810())
+	    i2c_register_board_info(2, n810_i2c_board_info_2,
+			ARRAY_SIZE(n810_i2c_board_info_2));
+		
 	mipid_dev_init();
 	blizzard_dev_init();
 }
-- 
1.5.5.4

Re: [i2c] N800 problems with MMC, LM8323 on current linux-omap git head

[Felipe Balbi]

On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 12:38:49 +0300, Riku Voipio <riku.voipio@iki.fi> wrote:
> Indeed - compared to my previous version, this one makes the boardfile
> even smaller:
> 
>    text    data     bss     dec     hex filename
>    2362    1552       4    3918     f4e
> old/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-n800.o
>    2354    1456       4    3814     ee6
> new/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-n800.o

Cool :-)

Acked-by: Felipe Balbi <felipe.balbi@nokia.com>

-- 
Best Regards,

Felipe Balbi
http://blog.felipebalbi.com
me@felipebalbi.com

Re: [i2c] N800 problems with MMC, LM8323 on current linux-omap git head

[Tony Lindgren]

* Felipe Balbi <me@felipebalbi.com> [080723 13:13]:
> 
> 
> On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 12:38:49 +0300, Riku Voipio <riku.voipio@iki.fi> wrote:
> > Indeed - compared to my previous version, this one makes the boardfile
> > even smaller:
> > 
> >    text    data     bss     dec     hex filename
> >    2362    1552       4    3918     f4e
> > old/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-n800.o
> >    2354    1456       4    3814     ee6
> > new/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-n800.o
> 
> Cool :-)

Pushing to linux-omap tree.

Tony


> Acked-by: Felipe Balbi <felipe.balbi@nokia.com>
> 
> -- 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Felipe Balbi
> http://blog.felipebalbi.com
> me@felipebalbi.com
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html