lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Jun]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH V15 6/9] mfd: pm8008: Use i2c_new_dummy_device() API
From

On 6/29/2022 8:48 PM, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Jun 2022, Satya Priya Kakitapalli (Temp) wrote:
>
>> On 6/28/2022 1:12 PM, Lee Jones wrote:
>>> On Tue, 28 Jun 2022, Satya Priya Kakitapalli (Temp) wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 6/27/2022 1:11 PM, Lee Jones wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 27 Jun 2022, Satya Priya Kakitapalli (Temp) wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Lee,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 6/20/2022 4:37 PM, Satya Priya Kakitapalli (Temp) wrote:
>>>>>>> On 6/20/2022 1:50 PM, Lee Jones wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 20 Jun 2022, Satya Priya Kakitapalli (Temp) wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 6/17/2022 2:27 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 14 Jun 2022, Satya Priya wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Use i2c_new_dummy_device() to register pm8008-regulator
>>>>>>>>>>> client present at a different address space, instead of
>>>>>>>>>>> defining a separate DT node. This avoids calling the probe
>>>>>>>>>>> twice for the same chip, once for each client pm8008-infra
>>>>>>>>>>> and pm8008-regulator.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> As a part of this define pm8008_regmap_init() to do regmap
>>>>>>>>>>> init for both the clients and define pm8008_get_regmap() to
>>>>>>>>>>> pass the regmap to the regulator driver.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Satya Priya <quic_c_skakit@quicinc.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org>
>>>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>>> Changes in V15:
>>>>>>>>>>>    - None.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Changes in V14:
>>>>>>>>>>>    - None.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Changes in V13:
>>>>>>>>>>>    - None.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>    drivers/mfd/qcom-pm8008.c       | 34
>>>>>>>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>>>>>>>>>>    include/linux/mfd/qcom_pm8008.h |  9 +++++++++
>>>>>>>>>>>    2 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>>>>>>>>    create mode 100644 include/linux/mfd/qcom_pm8008.h
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/qcom-pm8008.c b/drivers/mfd/qcom-pm8008.c
>>>>>>>>>>> index 569ffd50..55e2a8e 100644
>>>>>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/mfd/qcom-pm8008.c
>>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/mfd/qcom-pm8008.c
>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@
>>>>>>>>>>>    #include <linux/interrupt.h>
>>>>>>>>>>>    #include <linux/irq.h>
>>>>>>>>>>>    #include <linux/irqdomain.h>
>>>>>>>>>>> +#include <linux/mfd/qcom_pm8008.h>
>>>>>>>>>>>    #include <linux/module.h>
>>>>>>>>>>>    #include <linux/of_device.h>
>>>>>>>>>>>    #include <linux/of_platform.h>
>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -57,6 +58,7 @@ enum {
>>>>>>>>>>>    struct pm8008_data {
>>>>>>>>>>>        struct device *dev;
>>>>>>>>>>> +    struct regmap *regulators_regmap;
>>>>>>>>>>>        int irq;
>>>>>>>>>>>        struct regmap_irq_chip_data *irq_data;
>>>>>>>>>>>    };
>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -150,6 +152,12 @@ static struct regmap_config
>>>>>>>>>>> qcom_mfd_regmap_cfg = {
>>>>>>>>>>>        .max_register    = 0xFFFF,
>>>>>>>>>>>    };
>>>>>>>>>>> +struct regmap *pm8008_get_regmap(const struct pm8008_data *chip)
>>>>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>>>>> +    return chip->regulators_regmap;
>>>>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>>>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pm8008_get_regmap);
>>>>>>>>>> Seems like abstraction for the sake of abstraction.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Why not do the dereference inside the regulator driver?
>>>>>>>>> To derefer this in the regulator driver, we need to have the
>>>>>>>>> pm8008_data
>>>>>>>>> struct definition in the qcom_pm8008 header file.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think it doesn't look great to have only that structure in
>>>>>>>>> header and all
>>>>>>>>> other structs and enum in the mfd driver.
>>>>>>>> Then why pass 'pm8008_data' at all?
>>>>>>> There is one more option, instead of passing the pm8008_data, we could
>>>>>>> pass the pdev->dev.parent and get the pm8008 chip data directly in the
>>>>>>> pm8008_get_regmap() like below
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> struct regmap *pm8008_get_regmap(const struct device *dev)
>>>>>>>  {
>>>>>>>      const struct pm8008_data *chip = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>      return chip->regulators_regmap;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pm8008_get_regmap);
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> By doing this we can avoid having declaration of pm8008_data also in the
>>>>>>> header. Please let me know if this looks good.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Could you please confirm on this?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What's preventing you from passing 'regmap'?
>>>>>>> I didn't get what you meant here, could you please elaborate a bit?
>>>>> Ah yes. I authored you a patch, but became distracted. Here:
>>>>>
>>>>> -----8<--------------------8<-------
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
>>>>>
>>>>> mfd: pm8008: Remove driver data structure pm8008_data
>>>>> Maintaining a local driver data structure that is never shared
>>>>> outside of the core device is an unnecessary complexity. Half of the
>>>>> attributes were not used outside of a single function, one of which
>>>>> was not used at all. The remaining 2 are generic and can be passed
>>>>> around as required.
>>>> Okay, but we still need to store the regulators_regmap, which is required in
>>>> the pm8008 regulator driver. Could we use a global variable for it?
>>> Look down ...
>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> drivers/mfd/qcom-pm8008.c | 53 ++++++++++++++++++-----------------------------
>>>>> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/qcom-pm8008.c b/drivers/mfd/qcom-pm8008.c
>>>>> index c472d7f8103c4..4b8ff947762f2 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/mfd/qcom-pm8008.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/mfd/qcom-pm8008.c
>>>>> @@ -54,13 +54,6 @@ enum {
>>>>> #define PM8008_PERIPH_OFFSET(paddr) (paddr - PM8008_PERIPH_0_BASE)
>>>>> -struct pm8008_data {
>>>>> - struct device *dev;
>>>>> - struct regmap *regmap;
>>>>> - int irq;
>>>>> - struct regmap_irq_chip_data *irq_data;
>>>>> -};
>>>>> -
>>>>> static unsigned int p0_offs[] = {PM8008_PERIPH_OFFSET(PM8008_PERIPH_0_BASE)};
>>>>> static unsigned int p1_offs[] = {PM8008_PERIPH_OFFSET(PM8008_PERIPH_1_BASE)};
>>>>> static unsigned int p2_offs[] = {PM8008_PERIPH_OFFSET(PM8008_PERIPH_2_BASE)};
>>>>> @@ -150,7 +143,7 @@ static struct regmap_config qcom_mfd_regmap_cfg = {
>>>>> .max_register = 0xFFFF,
>>>>> };
>>>>> -static int pm8008_init(struct pm8008_data *chip)
>>>>> +static int pm8008_init(struct regmap *regmap)
>>>>> {
>>>>> int rc;
>>>>> @@ -160,34 +153,31 @@ static int pm8008_init(struct pm8008_data *chip)
>>>>> * This is required to enable the writing of TYPE registers in
>>>>> * regmap_irq_sync_unlock().
>>>>> */
>>>>> - rc = regmap_write(chip->regmap,
>>>>> - (PM8008_TEMP_ALARM_ADDR | INT_SET_TYPE_OFFSET),
>>>>> - BIT(0));
>>>>> + rc = regmap_write(regmap, (PM8008_TEMP_ALARM_ADDR | INT_SET_TYPE_OFFSET), BIT(0));
>>>>> if (rc)
>>>>> return rc;
>>>>> /* Do the same for GPIO1 and GPIO2 peripherals */
>>>>> - rc = regmap_write(chip->regmap,
>>>>> - (PM8008_GPIO1_ADDR | INT_SET_TYPE_OFFSET), BIT(0));
>>>>> + rc = regmap_write(regmap, (PM8008_GPIO1_ADDR | INT_SET_TYPE_OFFSET), BIT(0));
>>>>> if (rc)
>>>>> return rc;
>>>>> - rc = regmap_write(chip->regmap,
>>>>> - (PM8008_GPIO2_ADDR | INT_SET_TYPE_OFFSET), BIT(0));
>>>>> + rc = regmap_write(regmap, (PM8008_GPIO2_ADDR | INT_SET_TYPE_OFFSET), BIT(0));
>>>>> return rc;
>>>>> }
>>>>> -static int pm8008_probe_irq_peripherals(struct pm8008_data *chip,
>>>>> +static int pm8008_probe_irq_peripherals(struct device *dev,
>>>>> + struct regmap *regmap,
>>>>> int client_irq)
>>>>> {
>>>>> int rc, i;
>>>>> struct regmap_irq_type *type;
>>>>> struct regmap_irq_chip_data *irq_data;
>>>>> - rc = pm8008_init(chip);
>>>>> + rc = pm8008_init(regmap);
>>>>> if (rc) {
>>>>> - dev_err(chip->dev, "Init failed: %d\n", rc);
>>>>> + dev_err(dev, "Init failed: %d\n", rc);
>>>>> return rc;
>>>>> }
>>>>> @@ -207,10 +197,10 @@ static int pm8008_probe_irq_peripherals(struct pm8008_data *chip,
>>>>> IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH | IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW);
>>>>> }
>>>>> - rc = devm_regmap_add_irq_chip(chip->dev, chip->regmap, client_irq,
>>>>> + rc = devm_regmap_add_irq_chip(dev, regmap, client_irq,
>>>>> IRQF_SHARED, 0, &pm8008_irq_chip, &irq_data);
>>>>> if (rc) {
>>>>> - dev_err(chip->dev, "Failed to add IRQ chip: %d\n", rc);
>>>>> + dev_err(dev, "Failed to add IRQ chip: %d\n", rc);
>>>>> return rc;
>>>>> }
>>>>> @@ -220,26 +210,23 @@ static int pm8008_probe_irq_peripherals(struct pm8008_data *chip,
>>>>> static int pm8008_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
>>>>> {
>>>>> int rc;
>>>>> - struct pm8008_data *chip;
>>>>> -
>>>>> - chip = devm_kzalloc(&client->dev, sizeof(*chip), GFP_KERNEL);
>>>>> - if (!chip)
>>>>> - return -ENOMEM;
>>>>> + struct device *dev;
>>>>> + struct regmap *regmap;
>>>>> - chip->dev = &client->dev;
>>>>> - chip->regmap = devm_regmap_init_i2c(client, &qcom_mfd_regmap_cfg);
>>>>> - if (!chip->regmap)
>>>>> + dev = &client->dev;
>>>>> + regmap = devm_regmap_init_i2c(client, &qcom_mfd_regmap_cfg);
>>>>> + if (!regmap)
>>>>> return -ENODEV;
>>>>> - i2c_set_clientdata(client, chip);
>>>>> + i2c_set_clientdata(client, regmap);
>>> Here ^
>>
>> I have added a dummy device and set the client data by passing regmap, see
>> below:
>>
>> +       regulators_client = i2c_new_dummy_device(client->adapter,
>> client->addr + 1);
>> +       if (IS_ERR(regulators_client)) {
>> +               dev_err(dev, "can't attach client\n");
>> +               return PTR_ERR(regulators_client);
>> +       }
>> +
>> +       regulators_regmap = devm_regmap_init_i2c(regulators_client,
>> &qcom_mfd_regmap_cfg[1]);
>> +       if (!regmap)
>> +               return -ENODEV;
>> +
>> +       i2c_set_clientdata(client, regulators_regmap);
>>
>> Now if i try to get this regmap from regulator driver by doing
>>
>> struct regmap *regmap = dev_get_drvdata(pdev->dev.parent);
>>
>> it still gets me the regmap of pm8008@8 device and not the regulator device
>> regmap (0x9). Not sure if I'm missing something here.
> So you need to pass 2 regmap pointers?
>
> If you need to pass more than one item to the child devices, you do
> need to use a struct for that.


I need to pass only one regmap out of the two, but i am not able to
retrieve the correct regmap simply by doing i2c_set_clientdata

probably because we are having all the child nodes under same DT node
and thus not able to distinguish based on the dev pointer


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-06-30 11:39    [W:0.108 / U:0.352 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site