lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Jan]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v6 1/3] gpio: exar: add gpio for exar cards
On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 12:20 PM, Sudip Mukherjee
<sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com> wrote:
> Exar XR17V352/354/358 chips have 16 multi-purpose inputs/outputs which
> can be controlled using gpio interface.
>
> Add the gpio specific code.
>

My comments below


> +#include <linux/platform_device.h>
> +#include <linux/kernel.h>
> +#include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/init.h>
> +#include <linux/device.h>
> +#include <linux/pci.h>
> +#include <linux/gpio.h>

Alphabetical order?

> +
> +#define EXAR_OFFSET_MPIOLVL_LO 0x90
> +#define EXAR_OFFSET_MPIOSEL_LO 0x93
> +#define EXAR_OFFSET_MPIOLVL_HI 0x96
> +#define EXAR_OFFSET_MPIOSEL_HI 0x99
> +
> +static LIST_HEAD(exar_list);
> +static DEFINE_MUTEX(exar_list_mtx);
> +static struct ida ida_index;

> +static inline unsigned int read_exar_reg(struct exar_gpio_chip *chip,
> + int offset)
> +{
> + dev_dbg(chip->gpio_chip.parent, "%s regs=%p offset=%x\n",
> + __func__, chip->regs, offset);

__func__ is redundant for *_dbg() in case of Dynamic Debug. Do you
have other case in mind?

> +
> + return readb(chip->regs + offset);
> +}

> +static int gpio_exar_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> + struct pci_dev *dev = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> + struct exar_gpio_chip *exar_gpio, *exar_temp;
> + void __iomem *p;
> + int index = 1;
> + int ret;
> +
> + if (dev->vendor != PCI_VENDOR_ID_EXAR)
> + return -ENODEV;
> +
> + p = pci_ioremap_bar(dev, 0);
> + if (!p)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + exar_gpio = devm_kzalloc(&dev->dev, sizeof(*exar_gpio), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!exar_gpio) {
> + ret = -ENOMEM;
> + goto err_unmap;
> + }
> +
> + mutex_init(&exar_gpio->lock);
> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&exar_gpio->list);
> +
> + index = ida_simple_get(&ida_index, 0, 0, GFP_KERNEL);
> + mutex_lock(&exar_list_mtx);
> +
> + sprintf(exar_gpio->name, "exar_gpio%d", index);
> + exar_gpio->gpio_chip.label = exar_gpio->name;
> + exar_gpio->gpio_chip.parent = &dev->dev;
> + exar_gpio->gpio_chip.direction_output = exar_direction_output;
> + exar_gpio->gpio_chip.direction_input = exar_direction_input;
> + exar_gpio->gpio_chip.get_direction = exar_get_direction;
> + exar_gpio->gpio_chip.get = exar_get_value;
> + exar_gpio->gpio_chip.set = exar_set_value;
> + exar_gpio->gpio_chip.base = -1;
> + exar_gpio->gpio_chip.ngpio = 16;

> + exar_gpio->gpio_chip.owner = THIS_MODULE;

Do we still need this?

> + exar_gpio->regs = p;
> + exar_gpio->index = index;
> +
> + ret = gpiochip_add(&exar_gpio->gpio_chip);
> + if (ret)
> + goto err_destroy;
> +
> + list_add_tail(&exar_gpio->list, &exar_list);
> + mutex_unlock(&exar_list_mtx);
> +
> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, exar_gpio);
> +
> + return 0;
> +
> +err_destroy:
> + mutex_unlock(&exar_list_mtx);
> + mutex_destroy(&exar_gpio->lock);
> +err_unmap:

> + iounmap(p);

First of all, pci_iounmap_bar() (or how is it called?).
Second, question, when you get here is PCI device enabled or not? I
think it should be. Thus, is it enabled using PCI managed resources?
If so, you don't need this line and same in ->remove().

> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static int gpio_exar_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> + struct exar_gpio_chip *exar_gpio, *exar_temp1, *exar_temp2;

*_eg1, *_eg2 ?

> + struct pci_dev *pcidev;
> + int index;
> +
> + exar_gpio = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> + pcidev = to_pci_dev(exar_gpio->gpio_chip.parent);
> + index = exar_gpio->index;
> +
> + mutex_lock(&exar_list_mtx);
> + list_for_each_entry_safe(exar_temp1, exar_temp2, &exar_list, list) {
> + if (exar_temp1->index == exar_gpio->index) {
> + list_del(&exar_temp1->list);
> + break;
> + }
> + }
> + mutex_unlock(&exar_list_mtx);
> +
> + gpiochip_remove(&exar_gpio->gpio_chip);
> + mutex_destroy(&exar_gpio->lock);
> + iounmap(exar_gpio->regs);
> + ida_simple_remove(&ida_index, index);

> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, pcidev);

Not sure why it is here and in this form.

> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static struct platform_driver gpio_exar_driver = {
> + .probe = gpio_exar_probe,
> + .remove = gpio_exar_remove,
> + .driver = {
> + .name = "gpio_exar",
> + },
> +};
> +


> +static const struct platform_device_id gpio_exar_id[] = {
> + { "gpio_exar", 0},
> + { },
> +};
> +
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(platform, gpio_exar_id);

Don't see how it's used.
Perhaps just

#define DRIVER_NAME "gpio_exar"

.driver = {
.name = DRIVER_NAME,
},

MODULE_ALIAS("platform:" DRIVER_NAME);

?

> +static int __init exar_gpio_init(void)
> +{
> + ida_init(&ida_index);
> + platform_driver_register(&gpio_exar_driver);
> + return 0;
> +}

> +
> +static void __exit exar_gpio_exit(void)
> +{
> + platform_driver_unregister(&gpio_exar_driver);
> + ida_destroy(&ida_index);
> +}
> +
> +module_init(exar_gpio_init);
> +module_exit(exar_gpio_exit);

Do you need ida_* calls there? If you will use DEFINE_IDA() macro I
think you don't need it.
Thus, module_platform_driver().

--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-01-05 11:44    [W:0.093 / U:0.356 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site