On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 1:08 PM, Peter Tyser <[email protected]> wrote: > The patch looks good. I had a few minor nitpicky style comments below: > >> As suggested by Peter I've implemented the 16-pin support in the existing >> pca953x driver. So this is pretty much a re-write of the v1 patch. Is the >> commit >> message sufficient to document CONFIG_SYS_I2C_PCA953X_WIDTH or is >> there something under doc/ that I should be adding to. > > You could add a brief description to the top-level README file. There > is currently a bit of info in the "GPIO Support" section that could be > added to. > >> #include <common.h> >> @@ -38,22 +38,78 @@ enum { >> PCA953X_CMD_INVERT, >> }; >> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SYS_I2C_PCA953X_WIDTH >> +struct chip_ngpio { >> + uint8_t chip; >> + uint8_t ngpio; >> +}; > > Since this structure is 953x-specific I'd rename chip_ngpio > pca953x_chip_ngpio to clarify its a driver-specific structure and to > prevent the (unlikely) name collision down the road. > > The same comment applies to ngpio()->pca953x_ngpio(), > chip_ngpios[]->pca953x_chip_ngpios[]. > >> +static struct chip_ngpio chip_ngpios[] = CONFIG_SYS_I2C_PCA953X_WIDTH; >> +#define NUM_CHIP_GPIOS (sizeof(chip_ngpios) / sizeof(struct chip_ngpio)) >> + >> +/* >> + * Determine the number of GPIO pins supported. If we don't know we assume >> + * 8 pins. >> + */ >> +static int ngpio(uint8_t chip) >> +{ >> + int i; >> + >> + for (i = 0; i < NUM_CHIP_GPIOS; i++) { >> + if (chip_ngpios[i].chip == chip) >> + return chip_ngpios[i].ngpio; >> + } > > I'd remove the for loop braces above per the Linux CodingStyle > documentation that U-Boot adheres to. > > There should also be an empty line above the "return 8" below. > >> + return 8; >> +} >> +#else >> +#define ngpio(chip) 8 >> +#endif >> + >> /* >> * Modify masked bits in register >> */ >> static int pca953x_reg_write(uint8_t chip, uint addr, uint mask, uint data) >> { >> - uint8_t val; >> + uint8_t valb; >> + uint16_t valw; > > I'd remove one of the spaces between "valb" above. My understanding is > spaces shouldn't be used for such vertical alignment. > >> >> - if (i2c_read(chip, addr, 1, &val, 1)) >> - return -1; >> + if (ngpio(chip) <= 8) { >> + if (i2c_read(chip, addr, 1, &valb, 1)) >> + return -1; >> + >> + valb &= ~mask; >> + valb |= data; >> + >> + return i2c_write(chip, addr, 1, &valb, 1); >> + } else { >> + if (i2c_read(chip, addr << 1, 1, (u8*)&valw, 2)) >> + return -1; >> + >> + valw &= ~mask; >> + valw |= data; >> + >> + return i2c_write(chip, addr << 1, 1, (u8*)&valw, 2); >> + } >> +} >> >> - val &= ~mask; >> - val |= data; >> +static int pca953x_reg_read(uint8_t chip, uint addr, uint *data) >> +{ >> + uint8_t valb; >> + uint16_t valw; >> >> - return i2c_write(chip, addr, 1, &val, 1); >> + if (ngpio(chip) <= 8) { >> + if (i2c_read(chip, addr, 1, &valb, 1)) >> + return -1; >> + *data = (int) valb; > > The space in "(int) valb" should be removed. Same below. > >> + } else { >> + if (i2c_read(chip, addr << 1, 1, (u8*)&valw, 2)) >> + return -1; >> + *data = (int) valw; >> + } >> + return 0; >> } > > <snip> > >> + for (i = msb; i >= 0; i--) >> + printf("%x",i); >> + printf("\n"); >> + if (nr_gpio > 8) >> + printf("--------"); >> printf("-------------------\n"); > > What about changing the printing of '-'s to a for loop like > for (i = 19 + nr_gpio; i >0; i++) > puts("-"); > > I'll give the next iteration of the patch a shot, it looks like it > should work just fine. > > Best, > Peter >
Hi Peter, I'll try and get an updated patch through as soon as I can. I'm on a training course today and tomorrow but it won't take me long to make the changes you've suggested once I find some time. Thanks, Chris _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
