On 08/11/17 16:29, Sinan Kaya wrote:
Add support for probing the newer HW and also organize MSI capable hardware
into an array for maintenance reasons.
Signed-off-by: Sinan Kaya <[email protected]>
---
drivers/dma/qcom/hidma.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/dma/qcom/hidma.c b/drivers/dma/qcom/hidma.c
index e366985..4ef7d6f 100644
--- a/drivers/dma/qcom/hidma.c
+++ b/drivers/dma/qcom/hidma.c
@@ -50,6 +50,7 @@
#include <linux/slab.h>
#include <linux/spinlock.h>
#include <linux/of_dma.h>
+#include <linux/of_device.h>
#include <linux/property.h>
#include <linux/delay.h>
#include <linux/acpi.h>
@@ -104,6 +105,26 @@ static void hidma_free(struct hidma_dev *dmadev)
module_param(nr_desc_prm, uint, 0644);
MODULE_PARM_DESC(nr_desc_prm, "number of descriptors (default: 0)");
+#define HIDMA_MAX_DEV_MATCH 10
+
+struct hidma_cap {
+ const struct of_device_id of[HIDMA_MAX_DEV_MATCH];
+ const struct acpi_device_id acpi[HIDMA_MAX_DEV_MATCH];
+};
+
+static struct hidma_cap hidma_msi_cap = {
+ .of = {
+ {.compatible = "qcom,hidma-1.1",},
+ {.compatible = "qcom,hidma-1.2",},
+ {},
+ },
+
+ .acpi = {
+ {"QCOM8062"},
+ {"QCOM8063"},
+ {},
+ }
+};
Yikes, I dread to imagine where this is going...
Apologies if I wasn't very clear, but what I meant to imply by dropping
the of_device_get_match_data() hint was to follow one of the common
patterns where you either just have some version token:
enum foo_ver {
FOO_V1,
...
}
struct acpi_device_id foo_acpi_ids[] = {
{ "_FOO0001", FOO_V1 },
...
}
struct of_device_id foo_of_match[] = {
{ .compatible = "foo,v1", .data = (void *)FOO_V1 },
...
}
int foo_probe(struct device *dev) {
...
foodev->version = (enum foo_ver)
of_device_get_match_data(&dev->of_node)
...
}
int foo_reset(struct foodev *foodev) {
if (foodev->version == FOO_V1)
writel(0, foodev->base + 0x20);
else
writel(0, foodev->base + 0x30);
}
or if it fits the code better, encapsulate the relevant details directly:
struct foodata {
.offset = 0x20,
} foo_v1_data;
struct acpi_device_id foo_acpi_ids[] = {
{ "_FOO0001", (unsigned long)&foo_v1_data },
...
}
struct of_device_id foo_of_match[] = {
{ .compatible = "foo,v1", .data = &foo_v1_data },
...
}
int foo_probe(struct device *dev) {
...
foodev->data = of_device_get_match_data(dev->of_node)
...
}
int foo_reset(struct foodev *foodev) {
writel(0, foodev->base + foodev->data->offset);
}
Creating multiple sets of match tables seems completely backwards, and
frankly looks worse than the open-coded strcmps IMO.
Robin.
/* process completed descriptors */
static void hidma_process_completed(struct hidma_chan *mchan)
@@ -739,22 +760,16 @@ static int hidma_request_msi(struct hidma_dev *dmadev,
static bool hidma_msi_capable(struct device *dev)
{
struct acpi_device *adev = ACPI_COMPANION(dev);
- const char *of_compat;
- int ret = -EINVAL;
-
- if (!adev || acpi_disabled) {
- ret = device_property_read_string(dev, "compatible",
- &of_compat);
- if (ret)
- return false;
+ int ret;
- ret = strcmp(of_compat, "qcom,hidma-1.1");
- } else {
+ if (!adev || acpi_disabled)
+ ret = of_match_device(hidma_msi_cap.of, dev) != NULL;
+ else {
#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
- ret = strcmp(acpi_device_hid(adev), "QCOM8062");
+ ret = acpi_match_device(hidma_msi_cap.acpi, dev) != NULL;
#endif
}
- return ret == 0;
+ return ret;
}
static int hidma_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
@@ -954,6 +969,7 @@ static int hidma_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
static const struct acpi_device_id hidma_acpi_ids[] = {
{"QCOM8061"},
{"QCOM8062"},
+ {"QCOM8063"},
{},
};
MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, hidma_acpi_ids);
@@ -962,6 +978,7 @@ static int hidma_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
static const struct of_device_id hidma_match[] = {
{.compatible = "qcom,hidma-1.0",},
{.compatible = "qcom,hidma-1.1",},
+ {.compatible = "qcom,hidma-1.2",},
{},
};
MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, hidma_match);
