On Mon, 01 Sep 2014, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

> On Mon, 2014-09-01 at 10:22 +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Fri, 22 Aug 2014, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > 
> > > Intel Quark X1000 SoC supports IRQ based GPIO. This patch will
> > > enable MFD support for Quark X1000 and provide IRQ resources
> > > to Quark X1000 GPIO device driver.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Chang Rebecca Swee Fun <[email protected]>
> > > Tested-by: Chang Rebecca Swee Fun <[email protected]>
> > > Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
> 
> See my answers below.
> 
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/mfd/lpc_sch.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> > >  1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/mfd/lpc_sch.c b/drivers/mfd/lpc_sch.c
> > > index c4eb359..6145a4c 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/mfd/lpc_sch.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/mfd/lpc_sch.c
> > > @@ -37,6 +37,9 @@
> > >  #define GPIO_IO_SIZE     64
> > >  #define GPIO_IO_SIZE_CENTERTON   128
> > >  
> > > +/* Intel Quark X1000 GPIO IRQ Number */
> > > +#define GPIO_IRQ_QUARK_X1000     9
> > > +
> > >  #define WDTBASE          0x84
> > >  #define WDT_IO_SIZE      64
> > >  
> > > @@ -44,28 +47,37 @@ enum sch_chipsets {
> > >   LPC_SCH = 0,            /* Intel Poulsbo SCH */
> > >   LPC_ITC,                /* Intel Tunnel Creek */
> > >   LPC_CENTERTON,          /* Intel Centerton */
> > > + LPC_QUARK_X1000,        /* Intel Quark X1000 */
> > >  };
> > >  
> > >  struct lpc_sch_info {
> > >   unsigned int io_size_smbus;
> > >   unsigned int io_size_gpio;
> > >   unsigned int io_size_wdt;
> > > + int irq_gpio;
> > >  };
> > >  
> > >  static struct lpc_sch_info sch_chipset_info[] = {
> > >   [LPC_SCH] = {
> > >           .io_size_smbus = SMBUS_IO_SIZE,
> > >           .io_size_gpio = GPIO_IO_SIZE,
> > > +         .irq_gpio = -1,
> > >   },
> > >   [LPC_ITC] = {
> > >           .io_size_smbus = SMBUS_IO_SIZE,
> > >           .io_size_gpio = GPIO_IO_SIZE,
> > >           .io_size_wdt = WDT_IO_SIZE,
> > > +         .irq_gpio = -1,
> > >   },
> > >   [LPC_CENTERTON] = {
> > >           .io_size_smbus = SMBUS_IO_SIZE,
> > >           .io_size_gpio = GPIO_IO_SIZE_CENTERTON,
> > >           .io_size_wdt = WDT_IO_SIZE,
> > > +         .irq_gpio = -1,
> > > + },
> > > + [LPC_QUARK_X1000] = {
> > > +         .io_size_gpio = GPIO_IO_SIZE,
> > > +         .irq_gpio = GPIO_IRQ_QUARK_X1000,
> > >   },
> > >  };
> > >  
> > > @@ -73,6 +85,7 @@ static const struct pci_device_id lpc_sch_ids[] = {
> > >   { PCI_VDEVICE(INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_SCH_LPC), LPC_SCH },
> > >   { PCI_VDEVICE(INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_ITC_LPC), LPC_ITC },
> > >   { PCI_VDEVICE(INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_CENTERTON_ILB), LPC_CENTERTON 
> > > },
> > > + { PCI_VDEVICE(INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_QUARK_X1000_ILB), 
> > > LPC_QUARK_X1000 },
> > >   { 0, }
> > >  };
> > >  MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(pci, lpc_sch_ids);
> > > @@ -106,14 +119,26 @@ static int lpc_sch_get_io(struct pci_dev *pdev, int 
> > > where, const char *name,
> > >   return 0;
> > >  }
> > >  
> > > +static int lpc_sch_get_irq(struct resource *res, int irq)
> > > +{
> > > + if (irq < 0)
> > > +         return -EINVAL;
> > > +
> > > + res->start = irq;
> > > + res->end = irq;
> > > + res->flags = IORESOURCE_IRQ;
> > > +
> > > + return 0;
> > > +}
> > 
> > Why does this need to be a separate function?
> > 
> > I fear that the code will become unnecessarily fragmented, just for the
> > sake of it.
> 
> I could do this as a condition branch.

You could, but you don't.

> > >  static int lpc_sch_populate_cell(struct pci_dev *pdev, int where,
> > > -                          const char *name, int size, int id,
> > > -                          struct mfd_cell *cell)
> > > +                          const char *name, int size, int irq,
> > > +                          int id, struct mfd_cell *cell)
> > >  {
> > >   struct resource *res;
> > >   int ret;
> > >  
> > > - res = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*res), GFP_KERNEL);
> > > + res = devm_kcalloc(&pdev->dev, 2, sizeof(*res), GFP_KERNEL);
> > >   if (!res)
> > >           return -ENOMEM;
> > >  
> > > @@ -129,6 +154,10 @@ static int lpc_sch_populate_cell(struct pci_dev 
> > > *pdev, int where,
> > >   cell->ignore_resource_conflicts = true;
> > >   cell->id = id;
> > >  
> > > + ret = lpc_sch_get_irq(++res, irq);
> > > + if (!ret)
> > > +         cell->num_resources++;
> > 
> > Once again, you're masking errors.  If it's not an error, don't return
> > one.  If it is, filter it back and fail the bind.
> 
> I have to know if there is such resource or not. Taking into account you
> prefer to see lpc_sch_get_irq embedded in here I just can do as a
> condition branch and there will be no more question I hope.

This is true.

> > >   return 0;
> > >  }
> > >  
> > > @@ -141,19 +170,19 @@ static int lpc_sch_probe(struct pci_dev *dev,
> > >   int ret;
> > >  
> > >   ret = lpc_sch_populate_cell(dev, SMBASE, "isch_smbus",
> > > -                             info->io_size_smbus,
> > > +                             info->io_size_smbus, -1,
> > >                               id->device, &lpc_sch_cells[cells]);
> > >   if (!ret)
> > >           cells++;
> > >  
> > >   ret = lpc_sch_populate_cell(dev, GPIOBASE, "sch_gpio",
> > > -                             info->io_size_gpio,
> > > +                             info->io_size_gpio, info->irq_gpio,
> > >                               id->device, &lpc_sch_cells[cells]);
> > >   if (!ret)
> > >           cells++;
> > >  
> > >   ret = lpc_sch_populate_cell(dev, WDTBASE, "ie6xx_wdt",
> > > -                             info->io_size_wdt,
> > > +                             info->io_size_wdt, -1,
> > >                               id->device, &lpc_sch_cells[cells]);
> > >   if (!ret)
> > >           cells++;
> 
> 

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to