Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 11 May 2020 12:02:27 +0530 | From | Vinod Koul <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 3/3] soundwire: bus_type: add sdw_master_device support |
| |
On 30-04-20, 02:51, Bard Liao wrote: > @@ -24,9 +24,14 @@ int sdw_bus_master_add(struct sdw_bus *bus, struct device *parent, > struct sdw_master_prop *prop = NULL; > int ret; > > - if (!bus->dev) { > - pr_err("SoundWire bus has no device\n"); > - return -ENODEV;
This check is removed and not moved into sdw_master_device_add() either, can you add here or in patch 1 and keep checking the parent device please
> +int sdw_master_device_add(struct sdw_bus *bus, struct device *parent, > + struct fwnode_handle *fwnode) > +{ > + struct sdw_master_device *md; > + int ret; > + > + if (!bus) > + return -EINVAL; > + > + /* > + * Unlike traditional devices, there's no allocation here since the > + * sdw_master_device is embedded in the bus structure. > + */
Looking at this and empty sdw_master_device_release() above, makes me wonder if it is a wise move? Should we rather allocate the sdw_master_device() and then free that up in sdw_master_device_release() or it is really overkill given that this is called when we remove the sdw_bus instance as well...
> + md = &bus->md; > + md->dev.bus = &sdw_bus_type; > + md->dev.type = &sdw_master_type; > + md->dev.parent = parent; > + md->dev.of_node = parent->of_node; > + md->dev.fwnode = fwnode; > + md->dev.dma_mask = parent->dma_mask; > + > + dev_set_name(&md->dev, "sdw-master-%d", bus->link_id);
This give nice sdw-master-0. In DT this comes from reg property. I dont seem to recall if the ACPI/Disco spec treats link_id as unique across the system, can you check that please, if not we would need to update this.
-- ~Vinod
| |