Hi Dongchun,
On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 06:54:12PM +0800, Dongchun Zhu wrote:
> Add a V4L2 sub-device driver for DW9768 voice coil motor, providing
> control to set the desired focus via IIC serial interface.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dongchun Zhu <dongchun.zhu@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> MAINTAINERS | 1 +
> drivers/media/i2c/Kconfig | 13 ++
> drivers/media/i2c/Makefile | 1 +
> drivers/media/i2c/dw9768.c | 566 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 4 files changed, 581 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 drivers/media/i2c/dw9768.c
>
Thank you for the patch. Please see my comments inline.
[snip]
> +/*
> + * DW9768 requires waiting time (delay time) of t_OPR after power-up,
> + * or in the case of PD reset taking place.
> + */
> +#define DW9768_T_OPR_US 1000
> +#define DW9768_Tvib_MS_BASE10 (64 - 1)
Kernel macro names are uppercase only.
[snip]
> + /* Set AAC Timing */
> + if (dw9768->aac_timing != DW9768_AAC_TIME_DEFAULT) {
> + ret = i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(client, DW9768_AAC_TIME_REG,
> + dw9768->aac_timing);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + move_delay_us = dw9768_cal_move_delay(dw9768->aac_mode,
> + dw9768->clock_presc,
> + dw9768->aac_timing) / 100;
We could calculate this once in probe() and store the ready us value in
the dw9768 struct.
> +
> + for (val = dw9768->focus->val % DW9768_MOVE_STEPS;
> + val <= dw9768->focus->val;
> + val += DW9768_MOVE_STEPS) {
> + ret = dw9768_set_dac(dw9768, val);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(&client->dev, "%s I2C failure: %d",
> + __func__, ret);
> + return ret;
> + }
> + usleep_range(move_delay_us, move_delay_us + 1000);
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
[snip]
> + pm_runtime_enable(dev);
> + if (!pm_runtime_enabled(dev)) {
> + ret = dw9768_runtime_resume(dev);
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + dev_err(dev, "failed to power on: %d\n", ret);
> + goto err_clean_entity;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + ret = v4l2_async_register_subdev(&dw9768->sd);
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + dev_err(dev, "failed to register V4L2 subdev: %d", ret);
> + goto error_async_register;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +
> +error_async_register:
The recommendation is to name the labels after the clean-up task that needs
to be done. Should this one be called error_power_off?
> + if (!pm_runtime_enabled(dev))
> + dw9768_runtime_suspend(dev);
Shouldn't we also call pm_runtime_disable() here?
> +err_clean_entity:
> + media_entity_cleanup(&dw9768->sd.entity);
> +err_free_handler:
> + v4l2_ctrl_handler_free(&dw9768->ctrls);
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static int dw9768_remove(struct i2c_client *client)
> +{
> + struct v4l2_subdev *sd = i2c_get_clientdata(client);
> + struct dw9768 *dw9768 = sd_to_dw9768(sd);
> +
> + v4l2_async_unregister_subdev(&dw9768->sd);
> + v4l2_ctrl_handler_free(&dw9768->ctrls);
> + media_entity_cleanup(&dw9768->sd.entity);
> + pm_runtime_disable(&client->dev);
> + if (!pm_runtime_status_suspended(&client->dev))
pm_runtime_status_suspended() doesn't consider the runtime PM disable
state. There is also pm_runtime_suspended() and that should be correct
here.
Best regards,
Tomasz
