lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Sep]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] soundwire: bus: add enumerated slave to device list
    From
    Date

    >>> Currently slave devices are only added either from device tree or acpi
    >>> entries. However lets say, there is wrong or no entry of a slave device
    >>> in DT that is enumerated, then there is no way for user to know all
    >>> the enumerated devices on the bus.
    >>
    >> Sorry Srinivas, I don't understand your point.
    >>
    >> The sysfs entries will include all devices that are described in
    >> platform firmware (be it DT or ACPI).
    >
    > yes that is true, but it will not include all the enumerated devices on
    > the bus!
    >
    > In my case on a new board I was trying to figure out what devices are on
    > the bus even before even adding any device tree entries!

    We've seen this before but dynamic debug provides all the information
    you need. see e.g. the logs from
    https://sof-ci.01.org/linuxpr/PR2425/build4447/devicetest/

    jf-cml-rvp-sdw-1 kernel: [ 289.751974] soundwire sdw-master-0: Slave
    attached, programming device number
    jf-cml-rvp-sdw-1 kernel: [ 289.752121] soundwire sdw-master-0: SDW
    Slave Addr: 10025d070000 <<< HERE
    jf-cml-rvp-sdw-1 kernel: [ 289.752122] soundwire sdw-master-0: SDW
    Slave class_id 0, part_id 700, mfg_id 25d, unique_id 0, version 1

    > In second case I had a typo in the device tree entry and sysfs
    displayed
    > devices with that typo rather than actual enumerated device id.

    That's a feature, not a bug? We use what address the platform firmware
    provides. If it's inaccurate then nothing can work.

    >> If you add to sysfs entries unknown devices which happen to be present
    >> on the bus, then what? How would you identify them from the devices
    >> that are described in firmware?
    >
    > Both of them should be displayed in sysfs, core should be able to
    > differentiate this based on the presence of fw_node or of_node and not
    > bind!

    Core yes but user not so much. If the intent is to list the devices
    present on the bus, your patch still requires manual work.

    >> Also the sysfs entries describe properties, but if you haven't bound a
    >> driver then how would this work?
    >
    > This is would be informative, atleast in cases like me!
    >
    > All I want to know is the list of enumerated devices on the bus, If
    > doing this way is not the right thing, then am happy to try any suggestion!
    >
    > For now I have managed to figure out enumerated device ids on the bus
    > with this patch, I was hoping that other people would also hit such
    > issue, so I sent this patch!

    Now I get your point but
    a) you already have a dynamic debug trace to list all devices
    b) adding 'undeclared' devices would make things quite murky and is only
    half of the solution. We already struggle because we already have
    'ghost' devices in sysfs that are not physically present, and no way to
    differentiate between the two. If we did add those entries, then we'd
    need two new sysfs attributes such as
    'declared' and 'enumerated'.

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2020-09-09 18:03    [W:2.147 / U:0.612 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site