On Tue, 11 Sep 2018, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 5:36 PM Alexandre Belloni
> <alexandre.belloni@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 11/09/2018 16:59:09+0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 11:40 AM Alexandre Belloni
> > > <alexandre.belloni@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > On 11/09/2018 10:33:56+0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, 04 Sep 2018, Radu Pirea wrote:
> > > > > > Radu Pirea (6):
> > > > > > MAINTAINERS: add at91 usart mfd driver
> > > > > > dt-bindings: add binding for atmel-usart in SPI mode
> > > > > > mfd: at91-usart: added mfd driver for usart
> > > > > > MAINTAINERS: add at91 usart spi driver
> > > > > > spi: at91-usart: add driver for at91-usart as spi
> > > > > > tty/serial: atmel: change the driver to work under at91-usart mfd
> > > > > >
> > > > > > .../bindings/{serial => mfd}/atmel-usart.txt | 25 +-
> > > > > > MAINTAINERS | 16 +
> > > > > > drivers/mfd/Kconfig | 9 +
> > > > > > drivers/mfd/Makefile | 1 +
> > > > > > drivers/mfd/at91-usart.c | 71 +++
> > > > > > drivers/spi/Kconfig | 8 +
> > > > > > drivers/spi/Makefile | 1 +
> > > > > > drivers/spi/spi-at91-usart.c | 432 ++++++++++++++++++
> > > > > > drivers/tty/serial/Kconfig | 1 +
> > > > > > drivers/tty/serial/atmel_serial.c | 42 +-
> > > > > > include/dt-bindings/mfd/at91-usart.h | 17 +
> > > > > > 11 files changed, 606 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> > > > > > rename Documentation/devicetree/bindings/{serial => mfd}/atmel-usart.txt (76%)
> > > > > > create mode 100644 drivers/mfd/at91-usart.c
> > > > > > create mode 100644 drivers/spi/spi-at91-usart.c
> > > > > > create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/mfd/at91-usart.h
> > > > >
> > > > > Seeing as this patch-set has caused some issues this morning, I took
> > > > > the liberty to peruse back into its history to figure out where things
> > > > > started to go wrong. I also re-reviewed the MFD driver - and I'm glad
> > > > > I did!
> > > > >
> > > > > My Acked-by has been attached to the MFD portion since v5, which is
> > > > > why the code hasn't caught my eye before today. I reviewed the
> > > > > relocation of the *binding document* (serial => mfd with no changes)
> > > > > in v4 and nothing else. It appears as though you mistakenly added it
> > > > > to the *MFD driver* instead. This explains my confusion in v10 when I
> > > > > told you I'd already reviewed the binding document.
> > > > >
> > > > > As I said, I have re-reviewed the MFD driver and I'm afraid to say
> > > > > that I do not like what I see. Besides the missing header file and
> > > > > the whitespace tabbing errors, I do not agree with the implementation.
> > > > > Using MFD as a shim to hack around driver selection is not a valid
> > > > > use-case.
> > > > >
> > > > > What's stopping you from just using the compatible string directly to
> > > > > select which driver you need to probe?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Then you'd have multiple compatible strings for the same IP which is a
> > > > big no-no.
> > >
> > > It's still the same hardware device, isn't?
> > > What if the SPI or UART slave is not on-board, but on an expansion board?
> > > Then the SoC-specific .dtsi has no idea what mode should be used.
> > >
> > > Hence shouldn't the software derive the hardware mode from the full
> > > hardware description in DT? If that's impossible (I didn't look into detail
> > > whether an SPI bus can easily be distinguished from a UART bus), perhaps
> > > a mode property should be added?
> >
> > Yes, this is exactly what is done:
> >
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/lee/mfd.git/tree/drivers/mfd/at91-usart.c?h=ib-mfd-spi-tty-4.20-1#n33
>
> OK.
>
> I guess the main "hackish" part is that the mfd_cell uses of_compatible,
> which thus requires having additional compatible values?
>
> I think those can just be removed. AFAICS, the SPI and serial drivers already
> match against the "at91_usart_spi" resp. "atmel_usart_serial" platform device
> names?
The hackish part of this driver is that it's using MFD for something
which is clearly not an MFD. It's a USART device. Nothing more,
nothing less.
Does anyone have the datasheet to hand?
--
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Linaro Services Technical Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
