On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 11:12:04AM -0600, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> No objection on this addition, just a couple of comments to improve it:
>
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL(sdw_bus_master_add);
> > @@ -158,6 +183,8 @@ static int sdw_delete_slave(struct device *dev, void *data)
> > mutex_lock(&bus->bus_lock);
> >
> > if (slave->dev_num) { /* clear dev_num if assigned */
> > + irq_dispose_mapping(irq_find_mapping(bus->domain, slave->dev_num));
> > +
>
> could this be done conditionally. e.g.
>
> if (slave->prop.irq)
> irq_dispose_mapping(irq_find_mapping(bus->domain, slave->dev_num));
>
> > + slave->irq = irq_create_mapping(bus->domain, dev_num);
> > + if (!slave->irq) {
> > + dev_err(bus->dev, "Failed to map IRQ\n");
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + }
>
> ...and here....
>
> if (slave->prop.irq) {
> slave->irq = irq_create_mapping(bus->domain, dev_num);
> if (!slave->irq) {
> dev_err(bus->dev, "Failed to map IRQ\n");
> return -EINVAL;
> }
> }
>
Yeah I am happy to make those conditional, I guess it is cleaner
to not map IRQs if they wont be used.
> > @@ -369,6 +371,7 @@ struct sdw_dpn_prop {
> > * @clock_reg_supported: the Peripheral implements the clock base and scale
> > * registers introduced with the SoundWire 1.2 specification. SDCA devices
> > * do not need to set this boolean property as the registers are required.
> > + * @irq: call actual IRQ handler on slave, as well as callback
> > */
> > struct sdw_slave_prop {
> > u32 mipi_revision;
> > @@ -393,6 +396,7 @@ struct sdw_slave_prop {
> > u8 scp_int1_mask;
> > u32 quirks;
> > bool clock_reg_supported;
> > + bool irq;
>
> this can be confused with the 'wake_capable' property.
>
> maybe 'out_of_band_irq' ?
>
Yes I struggle on the name a bit and then just gave up and
went with plain "irq", hard to know what to call it. Not sure
out_of_band is quite right since it not really out of band,
handle_nested_irq pretty much basically boils down to a function
call really. Maybe something like "map_irq", or "use_domain_irq"?
> There should be an explanation and something checking that both are not
> used concurrently.
I will try to expand the explanation a litte, but I dont see any
reason to block calling both handlers, no ill effects would come
for a driver having both and it is useful if any soundwire
specific steps are needed that arn't on other control buses.
Thanks,
Charles
