On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 11:42:15AM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
>
>
> On 5/8/19 4:16 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 01:16:06PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > > On 07-05-19, 17:49, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > > The model here is that Master device is PCI or Platform device and then
> > > > > > creates a bus instance which has soundwire slave devices.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So for any attribute on Master device (which has properties as well and
> > > > > > representation in sysfs), device specfic struct (PCI/platfrom doesn't
> > > > > > help). For slave that is not a problem as sdw_slave structure takes care
> > > > > > if that.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So, the solution was to create the psedo sdw_master device for the
> > > > > > representation and have device-specific structure.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ok, much like the "USB host controller" type device. That's fine, make
> > > > > such a device, add it to your bus, and set the type correctly. And keep
> > > > > a pointer to that structure in your device-specific structure if you
> > > > > really need to get to anything in it.
> > > >
> > > > humm, you lost me on the last sentence. Did you mean using
> > > > set_drv/platform_data during the init and retrieving the bus information
> > > > with get_drv/platform_data as needed later? Or something else I badly need
> > > > to learn?
> > >
> > > IIUC Greg meant we should represent a soundwire master device type and
> > > use that here. Just like we have soundwire slave device type. Something
> > > like:
> > >
> > > struct sdw_master {
> > > struct device dev;
> > > struct sdw_master_prop *prop;
> > > ...
> > > };
> > >
> > > In show function you get master from dev (container of) and then use
> > > that to access the master properties. So int.sdw.0 can be of this type.
> >
> > Yes, you need to represent the master device type if you are going to be
> > having an internal representation of it.
>
> Humm, confused...In the existing code bus and master are synonyms, see e.g.
> following code excerpts:
>
> * sdw_add_bus_master() - add a bus Master instance
> * @bus: bus instance
> *
> * Initializes the bus instance, read properties and create child
> * devices.
>
> struct sdw_bus {
> struct device *dev; <<< pointer here
That's the pointer to what? The device that the bus is "attached to"
(i.e. parent, like a platform device or a pci device)?
Why isn't this a "real" device in itself?
I thought I asked that a long time ago when first reviewing these
patches...
> unsigned int link_id;
> struct list_head slaves;
> DECLARE_BITMAP(assigned, SDW_MAX_DEVICES);
> struct mutex bus_lock;
> struct mutex msg_lock;
> const struct sdw_master_ops *ops;
> const struct sdw_master_port_ops *port_ops;
> struct sdw_bus_params params;
> struct sdw_master_prop prop;
>
> The existing code creates a platform_device in
> drivers/soundwire/intel_init.c, and it's assigned by the following code:
The core creates a platform device, don't assume you can "take it over"
:)
That platform device lives on the platform bus, you need a "master"
device that lives on your soundbus bus.
Again, look at how USB does this. Or better yet, greybus, as that code
is a lot smaller and simpler.
>
> static int intel_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> {
> struct sdw_cdns_stream_config config;
> struct sdw_intel *sdw;
> int ret;
>
> sdw = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*sdw), GFP_KERNEL);
> [snip]
> sdw->cdns.dev = &pdev->dev;
> sdw->cdns.bus.dev = &pdev->dev;
Gotta love the lack of reference counting :(
> I really don't see what you are hinting at, sorry, unless we are talking
> about major surgery in the code.
It sounds like you need a device on your bus that represents the master,
as you have attributes associated with it, and other things. You can't
put attributes on a random pci or platform device, as you do not "own"
that device.
does that help?
greg k-h
_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
