Hi Lee,
2018-03-07 17:04 GMT+01:00 Lee Jones :
> On Mon, 26 Feb 2018, Enric Balletbo i Serra wrote:
>
>> With this patch, the cros_ec_ctl driver will register the legacy
>> accelerometer driver (named cros_ec_accel_legacy) if it fails to
>> register sensors through the usual path cros_ec_sensors_register().
>> This legacy device is present on Chromebook devices with older EC
>> firmware only supporting deprecated EC commands (Glimmer based devices).
>>
>> Tested-by: Gwendal Grignou
>> Signed-off-by: Enric Balletbo i Serra
>> Reviewed-by: Gwendal Grignou
>> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko
>> ---
>>
>> Changes in v3:
>> - [5/8] Add the Reviewed-by Andy Shevchenko.
>>
>> Changes in v2:
>> - [5/8] Add the Reviewed-by Gwendal.
>>
>> drivers/mfd/cros_ec_dev.c | 60
>> +++
>> 1 file changed, 60 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/cros_ec_dev.c b/drivers/mfd/cros_ec_dev.c
>> index 33fe1b439ee2..fd7f0068fb45 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mfd/cros_ec_dev.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mfd/cros_ec_dev.c
>> @@ -389,6 +389,63 @@ static void cros_ec_sensors_register(struct cros_ec_dev
>> *ec)
>> kfree(msg);
>> }
>>
>> +#define CROS_EC_SENSOR_LEGACY_NUM 2
>> +static struct mfd_cell
>> cros_ec_accel_legacy_cells[CROS_EC_SENSOR_LEGACY_NUM];
>> +
>> +static void cros_ec_accel_legacy_register(struct cros_ec_dev *ec)
>> +{
>> + struct cros_ec_device *ec_dev = ec->ec_dev;
>> + u8 status;
>> + int i, ret;
>> + struct cros_ec_sensor_platform
>> + sensor_platforms[CROS_EC_SENSOR_LEGACY_NUM];
>
> I wish I had seen this struct before. Yuk!
>
> Why do you even need to know what 'number' the sensor is?
>
>> + /*
>> + * EC that need legacy support are the main EC, directly connected to
>
> Nit: "ECs" or "needs". If you choose "needs" you need to s/are/is/ as
> well.
>
>> + * the AP.
>> + */
>> + if (ec->cmd_offset != 0)
>> + return;
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * Check if EC supports direct memory reads and if EC has
>> + * accelerometers.
>> + */
>> + if (!ec_dev->cmd_readmem)
>> + return;
>> +
>> + ret = ec_dev->cmd_readmem(ec_dev, EC_MEMMAP_ACC_STATUS, 1, &status);
>> + if (ret < 0) {
>
> Is ret > 0 valid?
>
Yes, ret > 0 is valid.
>> + dev_warn(ec->dev, "EC does not support direct reads.\n");
>> + return;
>> + }
>> +
>> + /* Check if EC has accelerometers. */
>> + if (!(status & EC_MEMMAP_ACC_STATUS_PRESENCE_BIT)) {
>> + dev_info(ec->dev, "EC does not have accelerometers.\n");
>> + return;
>> + }
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * Register 2 accelerometers
>> + */
>> + for (i = 0; i < CROS_EC_SENSOR_LEGACY_NUM; i++) {
>> + cros_ec_accel_legacy_cells[i].name = "cros-ec-accel-legacy";
>> + sensor_platforms[i].sensor_num = i;
>> + cros_ec_accel_legacy_cells[i].id = i;
>> + cros_ec_accel_legacy_cells[i].platform_data =
>> + &sensor_platforms[i];
>> + cros_ec_accel_legacy_cells[i].pdata_size =
>> + sizeof(struct cros_ec_sensor_platform);
>
> There is no dynamic information here.
>
> I'd rather you did this all statically.
>
Ok, I will create a static mfd_cell struct.
>> + }
>> + ret = mfd_add_devices(ec->dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO,
>> + cros_ec_accel_legacy_cells,
>> + CROS_EC_SENSOR_LEGACY_NUM,
>
> ARRAY_SIZE() is less fragile.
>
Ack.
>> + NULL, 0, NULL);
>> + if (ret)
>> + dev_err(ec_dev->dev, "failed to add EC sensors\n");
>> +}
>> +
>> static const struct mfd_cell cros_ec_rtc_cell = {
>> .name = "cros-ec-rtc",
>> };
>> @@ -440,6 +497,9 @@ static int ec_device_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> /* check whether this EC is a sensor hub. */
>> if (cros_ec_check_features(ec, EC_FEATURE_MOTION_SENSE))
>> cros_ec_sensors_register(ec);
>> + else
>> + /* Workaroud for older EC firmware */
>> + cros_ec_accel_legacy_register(ec);
>>
>> /* check whether this EC instance has RTC host command support */
>> if (cros_ec_check_features(ec, EC_FEATURE_RTC)) {
>
> --
> Lee Jones
> Linaro Services Technical Lead
> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
> Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
Thanks for the review. I'll prepare a new version of this patchset.
Enric
