Thanks for review,
On 01/07/2019 07:17, Vinod Koul wrote:
On 11-06-19, 11:40, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
This patch adds support to parsing device tree based
SoundWire slave devices.
Signed-off-by: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/soundwire/bus.c | 2 +-
drivers/soundwire/bus.h | 1 +
drivers/soundwire/slave.c | 54 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
3 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/soundwire/bus.c b/drivers/soundwire/bus.c
index fe745830a261..20f26cf4ba74 100644
--- a/drivers/soundwire/bus.c
+++ b/drivers/soundwire/bus.c
@@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ int sdw_add_bus_master(struct sdw_bus *bus)
if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ACPI) && ACPI_HANDLE(bus->dev))
ret = sdw_acpi_find_slaves(bus);
else
- ret = -ENOTSUPP; /* No ACPI/DT so error out */
+ ret = sdw_of_find_slaves(bus);
if (ret) {
dev_err(bus->dev, "Finding slaves failed:%d\n", ret);
diff --git a/drivers/soundwire/bus.h b/drivers/soundwire/bus.h
index 3048ca153f22..ee46befedbd1 100644
--- a/drivers/soundwire/bus.h
+++ b/drivers/soundwire/bus.h
@@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ static inline int sdw_acpi_find_slaves(struct sdw_bus *bus)
}
#endif
+int sdw_of_find_slaves(struct sdw_bus *bus);
void sdw_extract_slave_id(struct sdw_bus *bus,
u64 addr, struct sdw_slave_id *id);
diff --git a/drivers/soundwire/slave.c b/drivers/soundwire/slave.c
index f39a5815e25d..6e7f5cfeb854 100644
--- a/drivers/soundwire/slave.c
+++ b/drivers/soundwire/slave.c
@@ -2,6 +2,7 @@
// Copyright(c) 2015-17 Intel Corporation.
#include <linux/acpi.h>
+#include <linux/of.h>
#include <linux/soundwire/sdw.h>
#include <linux/soundwire/sdw_type.h>
#include "bus.h"
@@ -28,13 +29,14 @@ static int sdw_slave_add(struct sdw_bus *bus,
slave->dev.parent = bus->dev;
slave->dev.fwnode = fwnode;
- /* name shall be sdw:link:mfg:part:class:unique */
+ /* name shall be sdw:link:mfg:part:class */
nope we are not changing dev_set_name below so this comment should not
be modified
Am not sure why this change was here, I will remove this!
dev_set_name(&slave->dev, "sdw:%x:%x:%x:%x:%x",
bus->link_id, id->mfg_id, id->part_id,
id->class_id, id->unique_id);
slave->dev.release = sdw_slave_release;
slave->dev.bus = &sdw_bus_type;
+ slave->dev.of_node = of_node_get(to_of_node(fwnode));
slave->bus = bus;
slave->status = SDW_SLAVE_UNATTACHED;
slave->dev_num = 0;
@@ -112,3 +114,53 @@ int sdw_acpi_find_slaves(struct sdw_bus *bus)
}
#endif
+
+#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF)
+/*
+ * sdw_of_find_slaves() - Find Slave devices in master device tree node
+ * @bus: SDW bus instance
+ *
+ * Scans Master DT node for SDW child Slave devices and registers it.
+ */
+int sdw_of_find_slaves(struct sdw_bus *bus)
+{
+ struct device *dev = bus->dev;
+ struct device_node *node;
+
+ if (!bus->dev->of_node)
+ return 0;
this should be error, otherwise next condition of checking slaves wont
be triggered..
I agree! will fix this in next version.
_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
