lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Jul]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 2/4] spi: spi-altera-dfl: support n5010 feature revision
From
Date

On 7/5/21 3:16 AM, Martin Hundebøll wrote:
> From: Martin Hundebøll <mhu@silicom.dk>
>
> The Max10 BMC on the Silicom n5010 PAC is slightly different than the
> existing BMCs, so use a dedicated feature revision detect it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Martin Hundebøll <mhu@silicom.dk>
> Reviewed-by: Moritz Fischer <mdf@kernel.org>
> ---
>
> Changes since v3:
> * Changed "BMC's" to "BMCs"
> * Added Moritz' Reviewed-by
>
> Changes since v2:
> * None
>
> Changes since v1:
> * use feature revision from struct dfl_device instead of reading it
> from io-mem
>
> drivers/spi/spi-altera-dfl.c | 15 +++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-altera-dfl.c b/drivers/spi/spi-altera-dfl.c
> index 3e32e4fe5895..f6cf7c8d9dac 100644
> --- a/drivers/spi/spi-altera-dfl.c
> +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-altera-dfl.c
> @@ -111,6 +111,13 @@ static struct spi_board_info m10_bmc_info = {
> .chip_select = 0,
> };
>
> +static struct spi_board_info m10_n5010_bmc_info = {
> + .modalias = "m10-n5010",
> + .max_speed_hz = 12500000,
> + .bus_num = 0,
> + .chip_select = 0,
> +};

Other then the modalias, this is exactly the same as m10_bmc_info.

Why not set platform_data?

> +
> static void config_spi_master(void __iomem *base, struct spi_master *master)
> {
> u64 v;
> @@ -130,6 +137,7 @@ static void config_spi_master(void __iomem *base, struct spi_master *master)
>
> static int dfl_spi_altera_probe(struct dfl_device *dfl_dev)
> {
> + struct spi_board_info *board_info = &m10_bmc_info;
> struct device *dev = &dfl_dev->dev;
> struct spi_master *master;
> struct altera_spi *hw;
> @@ -172,9 +180,12 @@ static int dfl_spi_altera_probe(struct dfl_device *dfl_dev)
> goto exit;
> }
>
> - if (!spi_new_device(master, &m10_bmc_info)) {
> + if (dfl_dev->revision == FME_FEATURE_REV_MAX10_SPI_N5010)
> + board_info = &m10_n5010_bmc_info;

The revision is board parameter, I think this check could be improved.

There should be a

#define FME_FATURE_REV_MAX10_SPI_D5005 0

And it checked here instead of setting above.

And -EINVAL returned if the revision is not known.

> +
> + if (!spi_new_device(master, board_info)) {
> dev_err(dev, "%s failed to create SPI device: %s\n",
> - __func__, m10_bmc_info.modalias);
> + __func__, board_info->modalias);

Why isn't this error handled ?

Tom

> }
>
> return 0;

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-07-06 16:57    [W:0.093 / U:0.028 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site