Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] soundwire: core: add device tree support for slave devices

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Thanks for taking time to review.

On 08/08/2019 16:00, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:

@@ -35,6 +36,7 @@ static int sdw_slave_add(struct sdw_bus *bus,
      slave->dev.release = sdw_slave_release;
      slave->dev.bus = &sdw_bus_type;
+    slave->dev.of_node = of_node_get(to_of_node(fwnode));

shouldn't this protected by
#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF) ?

These macros and functions have dummy entries, so it should not be an issue.
I did build soundwire with i386_defconfig with no issues.

      slave->bus = bus;
      slave->status = SDW_SLAVE_UNATTACHED;
      slave->dev_num = 0;
@@ -112,3 +114,48 @@ int sdw_acpi_find_slaves(struct sdw_bus *bus)
  }
  #endif
+
+/*
+ * 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;
+
+    for_each_child_of_node(bus->dev->of_node, node) {
+        struct sdw_slave_id id;
+        const char *compat = NULL;
+        int unique_id, ret;
+        int ver, mfg_id, part_id, class_id;
+
+        compat = of_get_property(node, "compatible", NULL);
+        if (!compat)
+            continue;
+
+        ret = sscanf(compat, "sdw%x,%x,%x,%x",
+                 &ver, &mfg_id, &part_id, &class_id);
+        if (ret != 4) {
+            dev_err(dev, "Manf ID & Product code not found %s\n",
+                compat);
+            continue;
+        }
+
+        ret = of_property_read_u32(node, "sdw-instance-id", &unique_id);
+        if (ret) {
+            dev_err(dev, "Instance id not found:%d\n", ret);
+            continue;

I am confused here.
If you have two identical devices on the same link, isn't this property required and that should be a real error instead of a continue?

Yes, I agree it will be mandatory in such cases.

Am okay either way, I dont mind changing it to returning EINVAL in all the cases.


+        }
+
+        id.sdw_version = ver - 0xF;

maybe a comment in the code would help to make the encoding self-explanatory, as you did in the DT bindings

   Version number '0x10' represents SoundWire 1.0
   Version number '0x11' represents SoundWire 1.1

Makes sense, will fix this in next version.
This info is also available in bindings.


--srini

+        id.unique_id = unique_id;
+        id.mfg_id = mfg_id;
+        id.part_id = part_id;
+        id.class_id = class_id;
+        sdw_slave_add(bus, &id, of_fwnode_handle(node));
+    }
+    return 0;
+}

_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel




[Index of Archives]     [ALSA User]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Pulse Audio]     [Kernel Archive]     [Asterisk PBX]     [Photo Sharing]     [Linux Sound]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux