Re: [PATCH v9 08/24] wfx: add bus_sdio.c

Ulf Hansson
2022-01-12T10:52:01Z

[...]

> +static const struct of_device_id wfx_sdio_of_match[] = {
> + { .compatible = "silabs,wf200", .data = &pdata_wf200 },
> + { .compatible = "silabs,brd4001a", .data = &pdata_brd4001a },
> + { .compatible = "silabs,brd8022a", .data = &pdata_brd8022a },
> + { .compatible = "silabs,brd8023a", .data = &pdata_brd8023a },
> + { .compatible = "silabs,wfx-sdio", .data = &pdata_wfx_sdio },
> + { },
> +};
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, wfx_sdio_of_match);
> +
> +static int wfx_sdio_probe(struct sdio_func *func, const struct sdio_device_id *id)
> +{
> + const struct wfx_platform_data *pdata = of_device_get_match_data(&func->dev);
> + struct device_node *np = func->dev.of_node;
> + struct wfx_sdio_priv *bus;
> + int ret;
> +
> + if (func->num != 1) {
> + dev_err(&func->dev, "SDIO function number is %d while it should always be 1 (unsupported chip?)\n",
> + func->num);
> + return -ENODEV;
> + }
> +
> + if (!pdata) {
> + dev_warn(&func->dev, "no compatible device found in DT\n");
> + return -ENODEV;
> + }
> +
> + bus = devm_kzalloc(&func->dev, sizeof(*bus), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!bus)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + bus->func = func;
> + bus->of_irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, 0);
> + sdio_set_drvdata(func, bus);
> + func->card->quirks |= MMC_QUIRK_LENIENT_FN0 |
> + MMC_QUIRK_BLKSZ_FOR_BYTE_MODE |
> + MMC_QUIRK_BROKEN_BYTE_MODE_512;

This should not be needed any more, right?

> +
> + sdio_claim_host(func);
> + ret = sdio_enable_func(func);
> + /* Block of 64 bytes is more efficient than 512B for frame sizes < 4k */
> + sdio_set_block_size(func, 64);
> + sdio_release_host(func);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + bus->core = wfx_init_common(&func->dev, pdata, &wfx_sdio_hwbus_ops, bus);
> + if (!bus->core) {
> + ret = -EIO;
> + goto sdio_release;
> + }
> +
> + ret = wfx_probe(bus->core);
> + if (ret)
> + goto sdio_release;
> +
> + return 0;
> +
> +sdio_release:
> + sdio_claim_host(func);
> + sdio_disable_func(func);
> + sdio_release_host(func);
> + return ret;
> +}

[...]

Other than the above, this looks good to me!

Kind regards
Uffe