[lkml]   [2013]   [Oct]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRE: [PATCH 3/4] ARM: pinctrl: Add Broadcom Capri pinctrl driver
>> +config PINCTRL_CAPRI
>> + bool "Broadcom Capri pinctrl driver"
>> + select PINMUX
>> + select PINCONF
>> + help
>> + Say Y here to support Broadcom Capri pinctrl driver, which is used for
>> + the BCM281xx SoC family, including BCM11130, BCM11140, BCM11351,
>> + BCM28145, and BCM28155 SoCs. This driver requires the pinctrl
>> + framework. GPIO is provided by a separate GPIO driver.
>As mentioned this should be selecting and using GENERIC_PINCONF.
>Basically I want that to happen before we look further at this code.
>(But I'll take a quick glance anyway...)

Sure, working on it.

>> +#define CAPRI_PINCONF_PACK(val, mask) (((val) << 16) | ((mask) & 0xffff))
>> +#define CAPRI_PINCONF_UNPACK_VAL(conf) ((conf) >> 16)
>> +#define CAPRI_PINCONF_UNPACK_MASK(conf) ((conf) & 0xffff)
>This custom horror goes away by using the macros from genric pin config
><linux/pinctrl/pinconf-generic.h> instead.

Actually these are used differently than the pack/unpack functions in the pinconf-
generic.h. These pack the bit value and bit mask to be written to a register,
whereas the pinconf-generic ones pack the parameter id and value. But I get what
you're saying and will try to reuse as much as possible from the pinconf generic
functions and utils.

>> +static const struct capri_cfg_param capri_pinconf_params[] = {
>> + {"brcm,hysteresis", CAPRI_PINCONF_PARAM_HYST},
>> + {"brcm,pull", CAPRI_PINCONF_PARAM_PULL},
>> + {"brcm,slew", CAPRI_PINCONF_PARAM_SLEW},
>> + {"brcm,input_dis", CAPRI_PINCONF_PARAM_INPUT_DIS},
>> + {"brcm,drive_str", CAPRI_PINCONF_PARAM_DRV_STR},
>> + {"brcm,pull_up_str", CAPRI_PINCONF_PARAM_PULL_UP_STR},
>> + {"brcm,mode", CAPRI_PINCONF_PARAM_MODE},
>> +};
>As well as all this stuff...

OK. Will see if I can find something suitable for "input disable" and "mode"

>> +/* Standard pin register */
>Add some more elaborate explanation here. I am half-guessing that
>most of the registers are laid out like this and then there are
>two exceptions, then write that right here in the comment.
>(BTW: this is a HW/driver detail and should not be written in the
>device tree doc as was done in patch 2)

Yes you guessed correctly. Most of the pin have bit-field definitions like
the "standard" or "std" pin register. There are 12 pins that have the i2c
definitions, and 2 pins that have the hdmi definitions. Will add
explanation to the code.

However, I wanted to explain this in the DT doc as well because, for example,
setting a slew rate for an hdmi pin would be invalid.

>> +/* Macro to update reg with new pin config param */
>> +#define CAPRI_PIN_REG_SET(reg, type, param, val) \
>> + (((reg) & ~CAPRI_ ## type ## _PIN_REG_ ## param ## _MASK) \
>> + | (((val) << CAPRI_ ## type ## _PIN_REG_ ## param ## _SHIFT) \
>> + & CAPRI_ ## type ## _PIN_REG_ ## param ## _MASK))
>No thanks.
>Rewrite this into a static inline which has the same effect when
>compiling, but produces *WAY* more readable code than this
>horrid thing. Plus you can type the arguments.

Ok. The reason I used a macro is to take shortcuts given how the SHIFT
and MASK #defines follow the format

CAPRI_<pin type>_PIN_REG_<parameter name>_<mask or shift>

I'll try to simply this.

>> +#define _PIN(offset) (offset)
>This macro isn't exactly useful.
>> +/*
>> + * Pin number definition. The order here must be the same as defined in the
>> + * PADCTRLREG block in the RDB.
>> + */
>> +#define CAPRI_PIN_ADCSYNC _PIN(0)
>If it's just going to be like that, then skip the _PIN() macro.

Removed. Was following pinctrl-tegra20.c where they have the _GPIO and _PIN
macros. I guess it would be useful if we need to change the order of the enums
in the future, but that's not the case at the moment for capri.

>> +/* Process the pin configuration node */
>> +static int capri_pinctrl_dt_node_to_map(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev,
>> + struct device_node *pnode,
>> + struct pinctrl_map **map,
>> + unsigned *nmaps)
>> +{
>Make use of these from pinctrl-utils.c:
>Then you get rid of another big chunk of boilerplate code.
>After these changes the driver will be much smaller and
>cleaner and we can take a closer look.

Yea actually the generic code is similar to what I have, there are some
differences in terms of pre-allocating / re-allocating the pinctrl_maps.
Seems like there are very few users of these functions at the moment.
Anyway I'll try to make use of them.

Thanks for the review.


 \ /
  Last update: 2013-10-11 02:21    [W:0.427 / U:1.164 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site