From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24BD3ECAAD5 for ; Tue, 6 Sep 2022 12:29:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233488AbiIFM31 (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Sep 2022 08:29:27 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:60158 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S240221AbiIFM2i (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Sep 2022 08:28:38 -0400 Received: from mga18.intel.com (mga18.intel.com [134.134.136.126]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 485E924951; Tue, 6 Sep 2022 05:25:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1662467104; x=1694003104; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=VLnflIlhNOSKlv+K+sGMeC6Yi4HRSkPtWSqjX4XDHWo=; b=U9N+FlkdS0sYsBDdatUc3mzlVKsE6YvuLzFvuz94vnUau0EGpqfl813Y UBYWIblQvchfLB0b8JYx2LEqMITfM3qdXCfrSBaGv7ImPOphFXEEsuS8Z TuXDbIYa5hrrjmtnKjR+0AIsowMyrIpVNz/UMzbraunUi6jk9dC0ZP0L9 9Qzq3aMrQ7QpW6ijGSd1xeLdE7ltHrAmjA+1tIByZ05odJBRKypVCn6G0 oPo2FoaWsoc79QDncKXpe0uXUFOs51YnWJU22GYfXxsgvrH0s9T0+0sUN WQmGQRgSVKJpoipIXTX5gZBKSHDnR8I1hhUhDFRv3YAmHmVSn1s30Uy27 w==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10461"; a="279592183" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.93,294,1654585200"; d="scan'208";a="279592183" Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by orsmga106.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 Sep 2022 05:25:03 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.93,294,1654585200"; d="scan'208";a="565073686" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.54]) by orsmga003-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 Sep 2022 05:25:01 -0700 Received: from andy by smile.fi.intel.com with local (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1oVXdS-00970o-2G; Tue, 06 Sep 2022 15:24:58 +0300 Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2022 15:24:58 +0300 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Martyn Welch Cc: Linus Walleij , Bartosz Golaszewski , Martyn Welch , linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] gpio: pca953x: Add support for PCAL6534 Message-ID: References: <20220906082820.4030401-1-martyn.welch@collabora.co.uk> <20220906082820.4030401-5-martyn.welch@collabora.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220906082820.4030401-5-martyn.welch@collabora.co.uk> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 09:28:19AM +0100, Martyn Welch wrote: > From: Martyn Welch > > Add support for the NXP PCAL6534. This device is broadly a 34-bit version > of the PCAL6524. However, whilst the registers are broadly what you'd > expect for a 34-bit version of the PCAL6524, the spacing of the registers > has been compacted. This has the unfortunate effect of breaking the bit > shift based mechanism that is employed to work out register locations used > by the other chips supported by this driver. To accommodate ths, callback > functions have been added to allow alterate implementations of > pca953x_recalc_addr() and pca953x_check_register() for the PCAL6534. This looks much cleaner! ... > @@ -107,6 +109,7 @@ static const struct i2c_device_id pca953x_id[] = { > { "tca9539", 16 | PCA953X_TYPE | PCA_INT, }, > { "tca9554", 8 | PCA953X_TYPE | PCA_INT, }, > { "xra1202", 8 | PCA953X_TYPE }, > + > { } Missed Diodes? > }; > MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(i2c, pca953x_id); ... > + u8 (*recalc_addr)(struct pca953x_chip *chip, int reg , int off); > + bool (*check_reg)(struct pca953x_chip *chip, unsigned int reg, > + u32 checkbank); I would think of splitting this change. Like in a separate patch you simply create this interface and only add what you need in the next one. ... > +static bool pcal6534_check_register(struct pca953x_chip *chip, unsigned int reg, > + u32 checkbank) > +{ > + int bank; > + int offset; > + > + if (reg > 0x2f) { I guess code read and generation wise the if (reg >= 0x30) { is slightly better. > + /* > + * Reserved block between 14h and 2Fh does not align on > + * expected bank boundaries like other devices. > + */ > + int temp = reg - 0x30; > + > + bank = temp / NBANK(chip); > + offset = temp - (bank * NBANK(chip)); Parentheses are not needed fur multiplication, but if you insist... > + bank += 8; > + } else if (reg > 0x53) { In the similar way... > + /* Handle lack of reserved registers after output port > + * configuration register to form a bank. > + */ Comment style /* * Handle... */ > + int temp = reg - 0x54; > + > + bank = temp / NBANK(chip); > + offset = temp - (bank * NBANK(chip)); > + bank += 16; > + } else { > + bank = reg / NBANK(chip); > + offset = reg - (bank * NBANK(chip)); > + } > + > + /* Register is not in the matching bank. */ > + if (!(BIT(bank) & checkbank)) > + return false; > + > + /* Register is not within allowed range of bank. */ > + if (offset >= NBANK(chip)) > + return false; > + > + return true; > +} ... > - u8 regaddr = pinctrl | addr | (off / BANK_SZ); > > - return regaddr; > + return pinctrl | addr | (off / BANK_SZ); Stray change, or anything I have missed? ... > +/* The PCAL6534 and compatible chips have altered bank alignment that doesn't > + * fit within the bit shifting scheme used for other devices. > + */ Comment style. ... > @@ -1240,6 +1335,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id pca953x_dt_ids[] = { > > { .compatible = "nxp,pcal6416", .data = OF_953X(16, PCA_LATCH_INT), }, > { .compatible = "nxp,pcal6524", .data = OF_953X(24, PCA_LATCH_INT), }, > + { .compatible = "nxp,pcal6534", .data = OF_653X(34, PCA_LATCH_INT), }, > { .compatible = "nxp,pcal9535", .data = OF_953X(16, PCA_LATCH_INT), }, > { .compatible = "nxp,pcal9554b", .data = OF_953X( 8, PCA_LATCH_INT), }, > { .compatible = "nxp,pcal9555a", .data = OF_953X(16, PCA_LATCH_INT), }, Do you decide to drop Diodes compatible from the code? -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko