On 2016-04-03 12:51, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On 03/04/16 09:52, Peter Rosin wrote:
>> From: Peter Rosin <p...@axentia.se>
>>
>> Allocate an explicit i2c mux core to handle parent and child adapters
>> etc. Update the select/deselect ops to be in terms of the i2c mux core
>> instead of the child adapter.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Peter Rosin <p...@axentia.se>
> I'm mostly fine with this (though one unrelated change seems to have snuck
> in).  However, I'm not set up to test it - hence other than fixing the change
> you can have my ack, but ideal would be a tested by from someone with
> relevant hardware...  However, it looks to be a fairly mechanical change so
> if no one is currently setup to test it, then don't let it hold up the
> series too long!
> 
> Acked-by: Jonathan Cameron <ji...@kernel.org>

Thanks for your acks!

> Jonathan
>> ---
>>  drivers/iio/imu/inv_mpu6050/inv_mpu_acpi.c |  2 +-
>>  drivers/iio/imu/inv_mpu6050/inv_mpu_core.c |  1 -
>>  drivers/iio/imu/inv_mpu6050/inv_mpu_i2c.c  | 32 
>> +++++++++++++-----------------
>>  drivers/iio/imu/inv_mpu6050/inv_mpu_iio.h  |  3 ++-
>>  4 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/iio/imu/inv_mpu6050/inv_mpu_acpi.c 
>> b/drivers/iio/imu/inv_mpu6050/inv_mpu_acpi.c
>> index 2771106fd650..f62b8bd9ad7e 100644
>> --- a/drivers/iio/imu/inv_mpu6050/inv_mpu_acpi.c
>> +++ b/drivers/iio/imu/inv_mpu6050/inv_mpu_acpi.c
>> @@ -183,7 +183,7 @@ int inv_mpu_acpi_create_mux_client(struct i2c_client 
>> *client)
>>                      } else
>>                              return 0; /* no secondary addr, which is OK */
>>              }
>> -            st->mux_client = i2c_new_device(st->mux_adapter, &info);
>> +            st->mux_client = i2c_new_device(st->muxc->adapter[0], &info);
>>              if (!st->mux_client)
>>                      return -ENODEV;
>>      }
>> diff --git a/drivers/iio/imu/inv_mpu6050/inv_mpu_core.c 
>> b/drivers/iio/imu/inv_mpu6050/inv_mpu_core.c
>> index d192953e9a38..0c2bded2b5b7 100644
>> --- a/drivers/iio/imu/inv_mpu6050/inv_mpu_core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/iio/imu/inv_mpu6050/inv_mpu_core.c
>> @@ -23,7 +23,6 @@
>>  #include <linux/kfifo.h>
>>  #include <linux/spinlock.h>
>>  #include <linux/iio/iio.h>
>> -#include <linux/i2c-mux.h>
>>  #include <linux/acpi.h>
>>  #include "inv_mpu_iio.h"
>>  
>> diff --git a/drivers/iio/imu/inv_mpu6050/inv_mpu_i2c.c 
>> b/drivers/iio/imu/inv_mpu6050/inv_mpu_i2c.c
>> index f581256d9d4c..0d429d788106 100644
>> --- a/drivers/iio/imu/inv_mpu6050/inv_mpu_i2c.c
>> +++ b/drivers/iio/imu/inv_mpu6050/inv_mpu_i2c.c
>> @@ -15,7 +15,6 @@
>>  #include <linux/delay.h>
>>  #include <linux/err.h>
>>  #include <linux/i2c.h>
>> -#include <linux/i2c-mux.h>
>>  #include <linux/iio/iio.h>
>>  #include <linux/module.h>
>>  #include "inv_mpu_iio.h"
>> @@ -52,10 +51,9 @@ static int inv_mpu6050_write_reg_unlocked(struct 
>> i2c_client *client,
>>      return 0;
>>  }
>>  
>> -static int inv_mpu6050_select_bypass(struct i2c_adapter *adap, void 
>> *mux_priv,
>> -                                 u32 chan_id)
>> +static int inv_mpu6050_select_bypass(struct i2c_mux_core *muxc, u32 chan_id)
>>  {
>> -    struct i2c_client *client = mux_priv;
>> +    struct i2c_client *client = i2c_mux_priv(muxc);
>>      struct iio_dev *indio_dev = dev_get_drvdata(&client->dev);

Here, the existing code uses drv_get_drvdata to get from i2c_client to 
iio_dev...

>>      struct inv_mpu6050_state *st = iio_priv(indio_dev);
>>      int ret = 0;
>> @@ -84,10 +82,9 @@ write_error:
>>      return ret;
>>  }
>>  
>> -static int inv_mpu6050_deselect_bypass(struct i2c_adapter *adap,
>> -                                   void *mux_priv, u32 chan_id)
>> +static int inv_mpu6050_deselect_bypass(struct i2c_mux_core *muxc, u32 
>> chan_id)
>>  {
>> -    struct i2c_client *client = mux_priv;
>> +    struct i2c_client *client = i2c_mux_priv(muxc);
>>      struct iio_dev *indio_dev = dev_get_drvdata(&client->dev);

...and here too...

>>      struct inv_mpu6050_state *st = iio_priv(indio_dev);
>>  
>> @@ -136,16 +133,15 @@ static int inv_mpu_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
>>              return result;
>>  
>>      st = iio_priv(dev_get_drvdata(&client->dev));
>> -    st->mux_adapter = i2c_add_mux_adapter(client->adapter,
>> -                                          &client->dev,
>> -                                          client,
>> -                                          0, 0, 0,
>> -                                          inv_mpu6050_select_bypass,
>> -                                          inv_mpu6050_deselect_bypass);
>> -    if (!st->mux_adapter) {
>> -            result = -ENODEV;
>> +    st->muxc = i2c_mux_one_adapter(client->adapter, &client->dev, 0, 0,
>> +                                   0, 0, 0,
>> +                                   inv_mpu6050_select_bypass,
>> +                                   inv_mpu6050_deselect_bypass);
>> +    if (IS_ERR(st->muxc)) {
>> +            result = PTR_ERR(st->muxc);
>>              goto out_unreg_device;
>>      }
>> +    st->muxc->priv = client;
>>  
>>      result = inv_mpu_acpi_create_mux_client(client);
>>      if (result)
>> @@ -154,7 +150,7 @@ static int inv_mpu_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
>>      return 0;
>>  
>>  out_del_mux:
>> -    i2c_del_mux_adapter(st->mux_adapter);
>> +    i2c_mux_del_adapters(st->muxc);
>>  out_unreg_device:
>>      inv_mpu_core_remove(&client->dev);
>>      return result;
>> @@ -162,11 +158,11 @@ out_unreg_device:
>>  
>>  static int inv_mpu_remove(struct i2c_client *client)
>>  {
>> -    struct iio_dev *indio_dev = i2c_get_clientdata(client);
>> +    struct iio_dev *indio_dev = dev_get_drvdata(&client->dev);
> Why this change?  Seems unrelated.

...which is why I made this change. Maybe a bad call, but the inconsistency
disturbed me and I was changing the function anyway. I could split it out
to its own commit I suppose, or should I just not bother at all?

Cheers,
Peter

>>      struct inv_mpu6050_state *st = iio_priv(indio_dev);
>>  
>>      inv_mpu_acpi_delete_mux_client(client);
>> -    i2c_del_mux_adapter(st->mux_adapter);
>> +    i2c_mux_del_adapters(st->muxc);
>>  
>>      return inv_mpu_core_remove(&client->dev);
>>  }
>> diff --git a/drivers/iio/imu/inv_mpu6050/inv_mpu_iio.h 
>> b/drivers/iio/imu/inv_mpu6050/inv_mpu_iio.h
>> index e302a49703bf..bb3cef6d7059 100644
>> --- a/drivers/iio/imu/inv_mpu6050/inv_mpu_iio.h
>> +++ b/drivers/iio/imu/inv_mpu6050/inv_mpu_iio.h
>> @@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
>>  * GNU General Public License for more details.
>>  */
>>  #include <linux/i2c.h>
>> +#include <linux/i2c-mux.h>
>>  #include <linux/kfifo.h>
>>  #include <linux/spinlock.h>
>>  #include <linux/iio/iio.h>
>> @@ -127,7 +128,7 @@ struct inv_mpu6050_state {
>>      const struct inv_mpu6050_hw *hw;
>>      enum   inv_devices chip_type;
>>      spinlock_t time_stamp_lock;
>> -    struct i2c_adapter *mux_adapter;
>> +    struct i2c_mux_core *muxc;
>>      struct i2c_client *mux_client;
>>      unsigned int powerup_count;
>>      struct inv_mpu6050_platform_data plat_data;
>>
> 
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to