[PATCH 12/19] i2c-nomadik: Register sub-devices when passed via Device Tree

[PATCH 12/19] i2c-nomadik: Register sub-devices when passed via Device Tree

[Lee Jones]

Each I2C device can be correctly probed already using Device Tree,
but the sub-devices still have to be registered by calls to
i2c_register_board_info(). After this patch, each sub-device can
be registered directly from Device Tree instead, removing the
requirement for the aforementioned calls from platform code.

CC: linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
CC: Wolfram Sang <w.sang-bIcnvbaLZ9MEGnE8C9+IrQ@public.gmane.org>
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
---
 drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c |    4 ++++
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c
index 5d1a970..01231c2 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c
@@ -26,6 +26,7 @@
 #include <linux/pm_runtime.h>
 #include <linux/platform_data/i2c-nomadik.h>
 #include <linux/of.h>
+#include <linux/of_i2c.h>
 
 #define DRIVER_NAME "nmk-i2c"
 
@@ -998,6 +999,7 @@ static int nmk_i2c_probe(struct amba_device *adev, const struct amba_id *id)
 	}
 
 	adap = &dev->adap;
+	adap->dev.of_node = np;
 	adap->dev.parent = &adev->dev;
 	adap->owner	= THIS_MODULE;
 	adap->class	= I2C_CLASS_HWMON | I2C_CLASS_SPD;
@@ -1027,6 +1029,8 @@ static int nmk_i2c_probe(struct amba_device *adev, const struct amba_id *id)
 		goto err_add_adap;
 	}
 
+	of_i2c_register_devices(adap);
+
 	pm_runtime_put(&adev->dev);
 
 	return 0;
-- 
1.7.9.5

Re: [PATCH 12/19] i2c-nomadik: Register sub-devices when passed via Device Tree

[Linus Walleij]

On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Lee Jones <lee.jones-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> Each I2C device can be correctly probed already using Device Tree,
> but the sub-devices still have to be registered by calls to
> i2c_register_board_info(). After this patch, each sub-device can
> be registered directly from Device Tree instead, removing the
> requirement for the aforementioned calls from platform code.
>
> CC: linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
> CC: Wolfram Sang <w.sang-bIcnvbaLZ9MEGnE8C9+IrQ@public.gmane.org>
> Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>

The patch as such is fine.
Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>

...but there will be merge issues (of the type I'm
discussing with Arnd in another thread).

> ---
>  drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c |    4 ++++
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c
> index 5d1a970..01231c2 100644
> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c
> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c
> @@ -26,6 +26,7 @@
>  #include <linux/pm_runtime.h>
>  #include <linux/platform_data/i2c-nomadik.h>
>  #include <linux/of.h>
> +#include <linux/of_i2c.h>

This is clearly dependent on the other patches to I2C to
be merged first (the include above is not yet there in
linux-next even), so this patch should go into Wolfram's
tree right? Else we have to rip out all the patches to the
I2C driver from his tree and funnel it all through ARM SoC.

With the changes to the device tree itself being dependent
on this, they should thus also go through the I2C tree.

But they may be heavily dependent on the other DT
changes you've done, so they cannot be applied to
Wolfram's tree...

And thus you may need to hold this change off
until the I2C changes are upstream, or start creating
cross-tree dependencies.

Maybe I shouldn't worry about these things and just
ACK stuff, but I have such problems with cross-tree
merges myself so just trying to be helpful :-/

Yours,
Linus Walleij

Re: [PATCH 12/19] i2c-nomadik: Register sub-devices when passed via Device Tree

[Wolfram Sang]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2370 bytes --]

On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 04:42:36AM -0700, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> wrote:
> 
> > Each I2C device can be correctly probed already using Device Tree,
> > but the sub-devices still have to be registered by calls to
> > i2c_register_board_info(). After this patch, each sub-device can
> > be registered directly from Device Tree instead, removing the
> > requirement for the aforementioned calls from platform code.
> >
> > CC: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org
> > CC: Wolfram Sang <w.sang@pengutronix.de>
> > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
> 
> The patch as such is fine.
> Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
> 
> ...but there will be merge issues (of the type I'm
> discussing with Arnd in another thread).
> 
> > ---
> >  drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c |    4 ++++
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c
> > index 5d1a970..01231c2 100644
> > --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c
> > +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c
> > @@ -26,6 +26,7 @@
> >  #include <linux/pm_runtime.h>
> >  #include <linux/platform_data/i2c-nomadik.h>
> >  #include <linux/of.h>
> > +#include <linux/of_i2c.h>
> 
> This is clearly dependent on the other patches to I2C to
> be merged first (the include above is not yet there in
> linux-next even), so this patch should go into Wolfram's
> tree right? Else we have to rip out all the patches to the
> I2C driver from his tree and funnel it all through ARM SoC.

First, I'd like to have this patch squashed with "i2c: nomadik: Add
Device Tree support to the Nomadik I2C driver". I wanted to do this on
my own, but the patches do not apply to 3.6-rc5 (with or without
regulator removal patch from Linus)?

I can also take the I2C related changes to the devicetrees via my tree.
This is not uncommon. Some people prefer to do this via their soc-trees,
though. I don't care much since this is not really a hard dependency
causing build failures or merge conflicts, but just needs a little extra
time until the patches are all there...

Thanks,

   Wolfram

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Wolfram Sang                |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH 12/19] i2c-nomadik: Register sub-devices when passed via Device Tree

[Lee Jones]

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:52:02PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 04:42:36AM -0700, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > Each I2C device can be correctly probed already using Device Tree,
> > > but the sub-devices still have to be registered by calls to
> > > i2c_register_board_info(). After this patch, each sub-device can
> > > be registered directly from Device Tree instead, removing the
> > > requirement for the aforementioned calls from platform code.
> > >
> > > CC: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org
> > > CC: Wolfram Sang <w.sang@pengutronix.de>
> > > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
> > 
> > The patch as such is fine.
> > Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
> > 
> > ...but there will be merge issues (of the type I'm
> > discussing with Arnd in another thread).
> > 
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c |    4 ++++
> > >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c
> > > index 5d1a970..01231c2 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c
> > > @@ -26,6 +26,7 @@
> > >  #include <linux/pm_runtime.h>
> > >  #include <linux/platform_data/i2c-nomadik.h>
> > >  #include <linux/of.h>
> > > +#include <linux/of_i2c.h>
> > 
> > This is clearly dependent on the other patches to I2C to
> > be merged first (the include above is not yet there in
> > linux-next even), so this patch should go into Wolfram's
> > tree right? Else we have to rip out all the patches to the
> > I2C driver from his tree and funnel it all through ARM SoC.
> 
> First, I'd like to have this patch squashed with "i2c: nomadik: Add
> Device Tree support to the Nomadik I2C driver". I wanted to do this on
> my own, but the patches do not apply to 3.6-rc5 (with or without
> regulator removal patch from Linus)?

I'm really not keen on squashing all my patches together. They are
clearly have very different purposes. If you think they are closely
related, then pull them in sequentially, but please don't squash
all my work into a single patch for no other reason than convenience.

> I can also take the I2C related changes to the devicetrees via my tree.
> This is not uncommon. Some people prefer to do this via their soc-trees,
> though. I don't care much since this is not really a hard dependency
> causing build failures or merge conflicts, but just needs a little extra
> time until the patches are all there...

It would be better for all the Device Tree changes go in as a single
patch-set. Again, I don't care where they go, so long as they go in
together. arm-soc seems like the most generic place for them to be
pulled into though.

Kind regards,
Lee

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog

Re: [PATCH 12/19] i2c-nomadik: Register sub-devices when passed via Device Tree

[Wolfram Sang]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1913 bytes --]

Hi,

> > First, I'd like to have this patch squashed with "i2c: nomadik: Add
> > Device Tree support to the Nomadik I2C driver". I wanted to do this on
> > my own, but the patches do not apply to 3.6-rc5 (with or without
> > regulator removal patch from Linus)?
> 
> I'm really not keen on squashing all my patches together. They are
> clearly have very different purposes. If you think they are closely
> related, then pull them in sequentially, but please don't squash
> all my work into a single patch for no other reason than convenience.

I can't follow this reasoning. I never asked you to squash all patches,
only those two needed to get proper device tree support. Why would you
want to let the device being detected via DT and not scan the child
nodes immediately?

> > I can also take the I2C related changes to the devicetrees via my tree.
> > This is not uncommon. Some people prefer to do this via their soc-trees,
> > though. I don't care much since this is not really a hard dependency
> > causing build failures or merge conflicts, but just needs a little extra
> > time until the patches are all there...
> 
> It would be better for all the Device Tree changes go in as a single
> patch-set. Again, I don't care where they go, so long as they go in
> together. arm-soc seems like the most generic place for them to be
> pulled into though.

This reasoning I can follow, but how should I know you aimed for that? I
only saw a patch [3/3] in one series making the driver probable via DT
and a patch [12/19] in another series to scan the child nodes. That's
all the infos I got. Some more context would have been helpful. Is there
a branch somewhere with all the things collected?

Regards,

   Wolfram

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Wolfram Sang                |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH 12/19] i2c-nomadik: Register sub-devices when passed via Device Tree

[Lee Jones]

> > > First, I'd like to have this patch squashed with "i2c: nomadik: Add
> > > Device Tree support to the Nomadik I2C driver". I wanted to do this on
> > > my own, but the patches do not apply to 3.6-rc5 (with or without
> > > regulator removal patch from Linus)?
> > 
> > I'm really not keen on squashing all my patches together. They are
> > clearly have very different purposes. If you think they are closely
> > related, then pull them in sequentially, but please don't squash
> > all my work into a single patch for no other reason than convenience.
> 
> I can't follow this reasoning. I never asked you to squash all patches,
> only those two needed to get proper device tree support. Why would you
> want to let the device being detected via DT and not scan the child
> nodes immediately?

Ah, sorry. That's my fault for rushing though my ridiculously bloated post-
vacation inbox. I *stupidly* thought you wanted me to squash two different
patches, rather than these two. As such I unreservedly retract my previous
statement. Yes, please squash.

> > > I can also take the I2C related changes to the devicetrees via my tree.
> > > This is not uncommon. Some people prefer to do this via their soc-trees,
> > > though. I don't care much since this is not really a hard dependency
> > > causing build failures or merge conflicts, but just needs a little extra
> > > time until the patches are all there...
> > 
> > It would be better for all the Device Tree changes go in as a single
> > patch-set. Again, I don't care where they go, so long as they go in
> > together. arm-soc seems like the most generic place for them to be
> > pulled into though.
> 
> This reasoning I can follow, but how should I know you aimed for that? I
> only saw a patch [3/3] in one series making the driver probable via DT
> and a patch [12/19] in another series to scan the child nodes. That's
> all the infos I got. Some more context would have been helpful. Is there
> a branch somewhere with all the things collected?

There will be. I'm currently just Ack collecting. 

In fact wait ...

<3 mins pass>

Now there is:
  git://git.linaro.org/people/ljones/linux-3.0-ux500.git preview-for-next

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog

Re: [PATCH 12/19] i2c-nomadik: Register sub-devices when passed via Device Tree

[Wolfram Sang]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1227 bytes --]


> Ah, sorry. That's my fault for rushing though my ridiculously bloated post-
> vacation inbox.

:)

> > all the infos I got. Some more context would have been helpful. Is there
> > a branch somewhere with all the things collected?
> 
> There will be. I'm currently just Ack collecting. 
> 
> In fact wait ...
> 
> <3 mins pass>
> 
> Now there is:
>   git://git.linaro.org/people/ljones/linux-3.0-ux500.git preview-for-next

OK from having a glimpse, I'd prefer to squash (or have squashed)

	i2c: nomadik: Add Device Tree support to the Nomadik I2C driver
	Documentation: Device Tree binding information for i2c-nomadik driver
		(Documentation should go along with the code)
	i2c-nomadik: Register sub-devices when passed via Device Tree

into one patch and take that via the I2C tree. This will allow me to
resolve the merge conflict in my tree on my own. I don't see a strong
reason to have those go via arm-soc (like prevented build-failures or
easier merges), if I missed such a reason, please let me know.

Regards,

   Wolfram

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Wolfram Sang                |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH 12/19] i2c-nomadik: Register sub-devices when passed via Device Tree

[Lee Jones]

> > Now there is:
> >   git://git.linaro.org/people/ljones/linux-3.0-ux500.git preview-for-next
> 
> OK from having a glimpse, I'd prefer to squash (or have squashed)
> 
> 	i2c: nomadik: Add Device Tree support to the Nomadik I2C driver
> 	i2c-nomadik: Register sub-devices when passed via Device Tree

Sure, no problem

> 	Documentation: Device Tree binding information for i2c-nomadik driver
> 		(Documentation should go along with the code)

I'm still not too sure about how this benefits anyone. You can ensure
the documentation is placed in an adjacent patch, so it's just as easy
to make reference to.

> into one patch and take that via the I2C tree. This will allow me to
> resolve the merge conflict in my tree on my own. I don't see a strong
> reason to have those go via arm-soc (like prevented build-failures or
> easier merges), if I missed such a reason, please let me know.

I don't have any good reasons for you not to take the patch(es) though
your tree. Please go ahead.

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog

Re: [PATCH 12/19] i2c-nomadik: Register sub-devices when passed via Device Tree

[Wolfram Sang]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 693 bytes --]


> > 	Documentation: Device Tree binding information for i2c-nomadik driver
> > 		(Documentation should go along with the code)
> 
> I'm still not too sure about how this benefits anyone. You can ensure
> the documentation is placed in an adjacent patch, so it's just as easy
> to make reference to.

It makes reviewing a lot easier if the documentation what is supposed to
be coded and the actual code are in one place. It also prevents what
happened in this case where the documentation never showed up on the
i2c-list.

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Wolfram Sang                |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH 12/19] i2c-nomadik: Register sub-devices when passed via Device Tree

[Lee Jones]

Hi Wolfram,

Are you taking these soon? I've rebased on -next, but they're
still in my local delta.

Kind regards,
Lee

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog

Re: [PATCH 12/19] i2c-nomadik: Register sub-devices when passed via Device Tree

[Wolfram Sang]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 306 bytes --]


> Are you taking these soon? I've rebased on -next, but they're
> still in my local delta.

Applied to -next now, will push out later today.

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Wolfram Sang                |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH 12/19] i2c-nomadik: Register sub-devices when passed via Device Tree

[Lee Jones]

On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 04:42:36AM -0700, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Lee Jones <lee.jones-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> 
> > Each I2C device can be correctly probed already using Device Tree,
> > but the sub-devices still have to be registered by calls to
> > i2c_register_board_info(). After this patch, each sub-device can
> > be registered directly from Device Tree instead, removing the
> > requirement for the aforementioned calls from platform code.
> >
> > CC: linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
> > CC: Wolfram Sang <w.sang-bIcnvbaLZ9MEGnE8C9+IrQ@public.gmane.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
> 
> The patch as such is fine.
> Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
> 
> ...but there will be merge issues (of the type I'm
> discussing with Arnd in another thread).
> 
> > ---
> >  drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c |    4 ++++
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c
> > index 5d1a970..01231c2 100644
> > --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c
> > +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c
> > @@ -26,6 +26,7 @@
> >  #include <linux/pm_runtime.h>
> >  #include <linux/platform_data/i2c-nomadik.h>
> >  #include <linux/of.h>
> > +#include <linux/of_i2c.h>
> 
> This is clearly dependent on the other patches to I2C to
> be merged first (the include above is not yet there in
> linux-next even), so this patch should go into Wolfram's
> tree right? Else we have to rip out all the patches to the
> I2C driver from his tree and funnel it all through ARM SoC.
> 
> With the changes to the device tree itself being dependent
> on this, they should thus also go through the I2C tree.
> 
> But they may be heavily dependent on the other DT
> changes you've done, so they cannot be applied to
> Wolfram's tree...
> 
> And thus you may need to hold this change off
> until the I2C changes are upstream, or start creating
> cross-tree dependencies.
> 
> Maybe I shouldn't worry about these things and just
> ACK stuff, but I have such problems with cross-tree
> merges myself so just trying to be helpful :-/

If I send all my stuff though arm-soc, then I have no
dependencies at all. All my patches are based on the latest
-rc. It seems a little silly to split them all up and push
them through lots of different trees. That way we're bound
to increase the chances of merge conflicts surely?

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog