linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To: sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com, wharms@bfs.de
Cc: dan.carpenter@oracle.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, david.a.cohen@linux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] intel-mid: Fix sfi get_platform_data() return value issues
Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2016 14:20:14 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1473420014.11323.119.camel@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <32bf3578-ec96-b043-67a1-7c6defb8c88c@linux.intel.com>

On Thu, 2016-09-08 at 15:41 -0700, sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy wrote:

> 1. Rewrite GPIO expander logic to cover dynamic allocation. You have
> > to
> > check how it supposed to be in GPIO framework. IIRC gpio_base = -1
> I checked the expander driver logic. As long as we return platform
> data 
> as NULL, it by default falls back to dynamic allocation. So I think 
> returning NULL on gpio_base == -1 is itself enough to support the 
> dynamic allocation.
> 
> file: a/drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c
> 
> 755         pdata = dev_get_platdata(&client->dev);
> 756         if (pdata) {
> 757                 irq_base = pdata->irq_base;
> 758                 chip->gpio_start = pdata->gpio_base;
> 759                 invert = pdata->invert;
> 760                 chip->names = pdata->names;
> 761         } else {
> 762                 chip->gpio_start = -1;
> 763                 irq_base = 0;
> 764         }

Yes, but we get 2 parameters: IRQ line (if used) and gpio_base.
And I dunno how to proceed if we have gpio_base not set and IRQ line is
set.

So, it needs a comment what we will do. Currently it says that "Check if
the SFI record valid". So, if it's indeed so, than we can't use even
dynamic allocation.


>>> -	if (gpio_base < 0)
> > > +	if (gpio_base < 0) {
> > > +		pr_err("%s: Unknown GPIO base number, falling
> > > back
> > > to"
> > > +		       "dynamic allocation\n", __func__);
> > 

> > No. This not just the message you show and abort initialization, in
> > case
> > of dynamic allocation you have to proceed initialization.
> How about we go with following warning message. Since using dynamic
> gpio 
> allocation is not an error, I think a warning message is more than 
> enough here. Also , I don't see any value in adding "Unknown gpio
> base 
> number" to the error message. So we can remove it to fit the log
> message 
> into one line.
> 
> +       if (gpio_base == -1) {
> +               pr_warn("%s: falling back to dynamic gpio
> allocation\n",
> +                       __func__);

See above. Perhaps we need to prevent the device driver initialization.

> --- a/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_mpu3050.c
> > > +++ b/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_mpu3050.c
> > > @@ -14,15 +14,21 @@
> > >   
> > >   	i2c_info->irq = intr + INTEL_MID_IRQ_OFFSET;
> > > +
> > >   	return NULL;
> > This change doesn't belong to the series.
> Submitting a separate patch to fix this this single style issue seems
> to 
> be over kill. Will it be ok if I add this to my debug message patch ?

For me sounds okay, but what I know most of the maintainers doesn't
approve such changes ("white space" type of patches are most hateful).

So, I would not do this at all.

-- 
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Intel Finland Oy

  reply	other threads:[~2016-09-09 11:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <a42b4af5-e2a5-d922-b5a5-ab177bb15140@intel.com>
2016-09-07  1:04 ` [PATCH 1/1] intel-mid: Fix sfi get_platform_data() return value issues Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2016-09-07 12:15   ` Andy Shevchenko
2016-09-08  0:04     ` sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy
2016-09-08  9:49       ` Andy Shevchenko
2016-09-08  0:05   ` [PATCH v2 " Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2016-09-08 12:51     ` Andy Shevchenko
2016-09-08 22:41       ` sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy
2016-09-09 11:20         ` Andy Shevchenko [this message]
2016-09-09  2:07   ` [PATCH v3 1/3] " Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2016-09-09  2:07     ` [PATCH v3 2/3] intel-mid: Add valid error messages on init failure Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2016-09-09 11:27       ` Andy Shevchenko
2016-09-09  2:07     ` [PATCH v3 3/3] intel-mid: Move boundry check to the start of init code Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2016-09-09 11:30       ` Andy Shevchenko

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=1473420014.11323.119.camel@linux.intel.com \
    --to=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=dan.carpenter@oracle.com \
    --cc=david.a.cohen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=wharms@bfs.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).