Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] pinctrl: Add pinmux & GPIO controller driver for a new SoC

[Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com>]

On Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 02:49:42PM +0800, Rahul Tanwar wrote:
> Intel Lightning Mountain SoC has a pinmux controller & GPIO controller IP which
> controls pin multiplexing & configuration including GPIO functions selection &
> GPIO attributes configuration.
> 
> This IP is not based on & does not have anything in common with Chassis
> specification. The pinctrl drivers under pinctrl/intel/* are all based upon
> Chassis spec compliant pinctrl IPs. So this driver doesn't fit & can not use
> pinctrl framework under pinctrl/intel/* and it requires a separate new driver.
> 
> Add a new GPIO & pin control framework based driver for this IP.

> +static void eqbr_set_val(void __iomem *addr, u32 offset,

> +			 u32 mask, u32 set, raw_spinlock_t *lock)

This lock parameter is quite unusual. Can't you supply a pointer to a data
structure which has lock along with MMIO address?

> +{
> +	u32 val;
> +	unsigned long flags;
> +
> +	raw_spin_lock_irqsave(lock, flags);

> +	mask = mask << offset;

Same Q. Why do you need these...

> +	val = readl(addr);

> +	val = (val & ~mask) | ((set << offset) & mask);

...offset shifts? It's unusual.

> +	writel(val, addr);
> +	raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(lock, flags);
> +}

> +static int gpiochip_setup(struct device *dev, struct eqbr_gpio_desc *desc)
> +{
> +	struct gpio_irq_chip *girq;
> +	struct gpio_chip *gc;

> +#if defined(CONFIG_OF_GPIO)
> +	gc->of_node = desc->node;
> +#endif

Isn't it what GPIO library does for everybody?

> +
> +	if (!of_property_read_bool(desc->node, "interrupt-controller")) {

> +		dev_info(dev, "gc %s: doesn't act as interrupt controller!\n",
> +			 desc->name);

Is it fatal or non-fatal?

> +		return 0;

Ditto.

> +	}

> +}

> +static int gpiolib_reg(struct eqbr_pinctrl_drv_data *drvdata)
> +{
> +	struct device_node *np;

> +	struct eqbr_gpio_desc *desc;

desc is very confusing here, since GPIO library uses this term for GPIO
descriptors.

> +	struct device *dev;
> +	int i, ret;
> +	struct resource res;
> +

> +		ret = bgpio_init(&desc->chip, dev, desc->bank->nr_pins/8,

'nr_pins / 8,'

> +				 desc->membase + GPIO_IN,
> +				 desc->membase + GPIO_OUTSET,
> +				 desc->membase + GPIO_OUTCLR,
> +				 desc->membase + GPIO_DIR,
> +				 NULL,
> +				 0);
> +		if (ret) {
> +			dev_err(dev, "unable to init generic GPIO\n");
> +			return ret;
> +		}

> +	return 0;
> +}

> +static int eqbr_pinmux_set_mux(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev,
> +			       unsigned int selector, unsigned int group)
> +{
> +	struct eqbr_pinctrl_drv_data *pctl = pinctrl_dev_get_drvdata(pctldev);
> +	struct function_desc *func;
> +	struct group_desc *grp;
> +	unsigned int *pinmux;
> +	int i;


> +	pinmux = grp->data;
> +	for (i = 0; i < grp->num_pins; i++)
> +		eqbr_set_pin_mux(pctl, pinmux[i], grp->pins[i]);

Shouldn't be this part serialized?

Same Q to all similar places. I guess I already mentioned this in previous
review.

> +	return 0;
> +}

> +static int is_func_exist(struct eqbr_pmx_func *funcs, const char *name,

Looks like it better to be boolean.

> +			 unsigned int nr_funcs, unsigned int *idx)
> +{
> +	int i;
> +
> +	if (!funcs || !nr_funcs)
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < nr_funcs; i++) {

> +

Redundant blank line.

> +		if (funcs[i].name && (strcmp(funcs[i].name, name) == 0) ) {
> +			*idx = i;
> +			return 1;
> +		}
> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}

> +static int funcs_utils(struct device *dev, struct eqbr_pmx_func *funcs,
> +		       unsigned int *nr_funcs, funcs_util_ops op)
> +{
> +	struct device_node *node = dev->of_node;
> +	struct device_node *np;
> +	struct property *prop;
> +	unsigned int fid;
> +	const char *fn_name;
> +	int i, j;
> +
> +	i = 0;
> +	for_each_child_of_node(node, np) {
> +		prop = of_find_property(np, "groups", NULL);

> +		if (prop) {

Why not
		if (!prop)
			continue;
?

> +			if (of_property_read_string(np, "function",
> +						    &fn_name)) {

It's perfectly one line. Perhaps you may need to configure your text editor.

> +			}

> +		}
> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}

> +	for (i=0; i < nr_funcs; i++) {

The better style is 'i = 0' and so on.
Simple be consistent. Or do everywhere 'i=0; i<nr_func; i++', etc. But remember
that this is for sure will be declined by most of the maintainers.

> +	}

> +static int eqbr_build_groups(struct eqbr_pinctrl_drv_data *drvdata)
> +{
> +	struct device *dev = drvdata->dev;
> +	struct device_node *node = dev->of_node;
> +	struct device_node *np;
> +	struct property *prop;
> +	int j, err;
> +	unsigned int *pinmux, pin_id, pinmux_id;
> +	struct group_desc group;
> +
> +	for_each_child_of_node(node, np) {
> +		prop = of_find_property(np, "groups", NULL);

> +		if (prop) {

	if (!prop)
		continue;

	?

> +		}
> +		memset(&group, 0, sizeof(group));
> +		pinmux = NULL;
> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}

> +static int pinbank_init(struct device_node *np,
> +			struct eqbr_pinctrl_drv_data *drvdata,
> +			struct eqbr_pin_bank *bank, unsigned int id)
> +{
> +	struct device *dev = drvdata->dev;
> +	struct of_phandle_args spec;
> +
> +	bank->membase = drvdata->membase + id * PAD_REG_OFF;
> +

> +	if (of_parse_phandle_with_fixed_args(np, "gpio-ranges", 3, 0, &spec)) {
> +		dev_err(dev, "gpio-range not available!\n");

> +		return -EFAULT;

Shadowing error code with actually unsuitable one.

> +	}

> +	return 0;
> +}

> +	int i=0, nr_gpio=0;

Style.
Besides the fact that better to put assignments closer to their usage.

> +static int eqbr_pinctrl_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> +	struct eqbr_pinctrl_drv_data *drvdata;
> +	struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	drvdata = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*drvdata), GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!drvdata)
> +		return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +	drvdata->dev = dev;

> +	platform_set_drvdata(pdev, drvdata);

I think this makes sense to do as last call in the function.

> +	drvdata->membase = devm_platform_ioremap_resource(pdev, 0);
> +	if (IS_ERR(drvdata->membase))
> +		return PTR_ERR(drvdata->membase);
> +
> +	ret = pinbank_probe(drvdata);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	ret = pinctrl_reg(drvdata);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	ret = gpiolib_reg(drvdata);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko