From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Graham Gower Subject: Re: UCB1400: Passing IRQ through platform_data Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 12:09:19 +1030 Message-ID: <4BA81BC7.9040107@gmail.com> References: <4BA70831.1040606@gmail.com> <201003221413.20841.marek.vasut@gmail.com> <4BA7F2CA.1060608@gmail.com> <201003230159.19010.marek.vasut@gmail.com> <0D753D10438DA54287A00B02708426976368DDD220@AUSP01VMBX24.collaborationhost.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from mail-fx0-f223.google.com ([209.85.220.223]:49719 "EHLO mail-fx0-f223.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756235Ab0CWBja (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Mar 2010 21:39:30 -0400 Received: by fxm23 with SMTP id 23so1467010fxm.21 for ; Mon, 22 Mar 2010 18:39:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <0D753D10438DA54287A00B02708426976368DDD220@AUSP01VMBX24.collaborationhost.net> Sender: linux-input-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org To: H Hartley Sweeten Cc: Marek Vasut , "linux-input@vger.kernel.org" H Hartley Sweeten wrote: > On Monday, March 22, 2010 5:59 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: >> Dne Po 22. b=C5=99ezna 2010 23:44:26 Graham Gower napsal(a): >>> Marek Vasut wrote: >>>> Dne Po 22. b=C5=99ezna 2010 07:03:29 Graham Gower napsal(a): >>>>> Hi Marek, >>>>> I wish to use the ucb1400_ts driver on my device. But I'm having = trouble >>>>> passing the platform_data to the ucb1400_core driver. >>>>> >>>>> I couldn't see any in tree examples of this being done and my att= empts >>>>> to do this via registering a platform_driver for ucb1400_core hav= e >>>>> failed (probably since this driver is ac97_bus_type, not a >>>>> platform_driver). >>>>> >>>>> Can you provide me with info regarding the correct method for pas= sing >>>>> the irq to the driver? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> -Graham >>>> static struct ucb1400_pdata pdata =3D { >>>> .irq =3D IRQ_GPIO(123), >>>> }; >>>> >>>> static struct platform_device ucb1400_core =3D { >>>> .name =3D "ucb1400_core", >>>> .id =3D -1, >>>> .dev =3D { >>>> .platform_data =3D &pdata, >>>> }, >>>> }; >>>> >>>> init() { >>>> platform_device_register(&ucb1400_core); >>>> } >>>> >>>> Like this ? >>> That is the first thing I tried and it doesn't work. I suggest you = printk >>> the pdata in the ucb1400_core driver after having done this to conf= irm (I >>> got NULL). You don't need to register a platform driver for >>> ucb1400_core_probe() to be called anyway - presumably its enumerat= ed from >>> the ac97 bus. >> Oh yes you have to, otherwise the pdata won't be passed. Besides, it= 's weird=20 >> probe()'s called if you didn't register it. But obviously whatever c= alls it=20 >> doesn't pass the pdata. >=20 > The driver is registered with platform_driver_register, as such it wi= ll be tied > to the platform bus not the ac97 bus. Being a platform driver, you d= o need a > matching platform_device_register so that you get a device<->driver b= inding. I suspect we are looking at different files, or different versions of t= he file. I'm looking at drivers/mfd/ucb1400_core.c, which looks like this: http://git.kernel.org/?p=3Dlinux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=3D= blob;f=3Ddrivers/mfd/ucb1400_core.c;hb=3DHEAD The ucb1400_core is registered with driver_register. I have grepped my tree and the only places I see "ucb12400_core" are in= a couple of arm board files and in my board file. Mine is commented out, and I d= efinitely still get the probe being called. I added dump_stack() to the probe function. [<80014f50>] dump_stack+0x8/0x34 [<801b1dec>] ucb1400_core_probe+0x48/0x1ac [<801ab114>] driver_probe_device+0x128/0x254 [<801aa440>] bus_for_each_drv+0x60/0xb0 [<801ab3e4>] device_attach+0x60/0x88 [<801aa234>] bus_probe_device+0x30/0x54 [<801a8a74>] device_add+0x368/0x4f0 [<80210970>] snd_ac97_dev_register+0xa0/0xd8 [<801ef6e8>] snd_device_register_all+0x44/0x80 [<801eb2f4>] snd_card_register+0x64/0x18c [<80216f3c>] snd_soc_instantiate_cards+0x368/0x5c4 [<80217214>] soc_probe+0x7c/0xc4 [<801ab114>] driver_probe_device+0x128/0x254 [<801aa440>] bus_for_each_drv+0x60/0xb0 [<801ab3e4>] device_attach+0x60/0x88 [<801aa234>] bus_probe_device+0x30/0x54 [<801a8a74>] device_add+0x368/0x4f0 [<801aca5c>] platform_device_add+0x14c/0x1b8 [<803813a4>] quokka_init+0x98/0xec [<800180f0>] do_one_initcall+0x68/0x200 [<80371328>] kernel_init+0xc4/0x164 [<8001ac2c>] kernel_thread_helper+0x10/0x18 >=20 >> And yes, I printk'd it when I was sending this patch in and it worke= d for me ...=20 >> register the platform device and you should be ok. >>>> btw. you don't have to pass pdata at all ... the logic for auto-de= tecting >>>> IRQ is still there and is active if no pdata are supplied. >>> This does not work for me. I have not yet investigated why. >> I'd better get rid of that autodetection stuff altogether, but fttb = it can be=20 >> there. >=20 > Another reason your irq might not be working is that its not valid. = Is gpio 123 > a valid IRQ producer on your platform? IRQ_GPIO(123) might resolve t= o > (ucb->irq < 0) which would cause the probe to try auto detecting the = irq. This has nothing to do with the irq number that I'm passing (which is n= ot 123 anyway). The ucb1400_core's dev->platform_data pointer is NULL. >=20 > BTW, this driver looks a little scary. >=20 > The 'platform data' that is passed to the driver is also the 'private= data' used > by the driver. Since the only data passed by the platform is the irq= it would > probably be cleaner to pass a struct ucb1400_pdata to the driver and = kzalloc > the private struct ucb1400_ts data in the driver. >=20 > Just my 0.02... >=20 > Regards, > Hartley -Graham -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" = in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html