Hello Sylwester, Thanks for the review. On 10 June 2014 16:09, Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 10/06/14 12:08, Naveen Krishna Chatradhi wrote: >> Currently, spi-s3c64xx.c needs "cs-gpio" chip select GPIO to be >> defined under "controller-data" node under each slave node. >> >> &spi_x { >> cs-gpios <>; >> ... >> slave_node { >> >> controller-data { >> cs-gpio = <>; >> ... >> }; >> ... >> }; >> ... >> }; >> >> Where as, SPI core and many other drivers uses "cs-gpios" for >> from device tree node. >> >> Hence, make changes in spi-s3c64xx.c driver to make use of >> "cs-gpios" from SPI node(parent) instead of "cs-gpio" defined in >> slaves "controller-data"(child) node. >> >> Also updates the Device tree Documentation. >> >> Signed-off-by: Naveen Krishna Chatradhi <ch.naveen@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: Javier Martinez Canillas <javier.martinez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: Doug Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> Changes since v1: >> 1. fixed a compilation warning thus squashing the other patch into this. >> 2. Updated device tree description in spi-samsung.txt >> >> .../devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-samsung.txt | 8 ++- >> drivers/spi/spi-s3c64xx.c | 56 ++++++++++++-------- >> 2 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-samsung.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-samsung.txt >> index 86aa061..13bfcb5 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-samsung.txt >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-samsung.txt >> @@ -42,15 +42,13 @@ Optional Board Specific Properties: >> - num-cs: Specifies the number of chip select lines supported. If >> not specified, the default number of chip select lines is set to 1. >> >> +- cs-gpios: should specify GPIOs used for chipselects (see spi-bus.txt) >> + >> SPI Controller specific data in SPI slave nodes: >> >> - The spi slave nodes should provide the following information which is required >> by the spi controller. >> >> - - cs-gpio: A gpio specifier that specifies the gpio line used as >> - the slave select line by the spi controller. The format of the gpio >> - specifier depends on the gpio controller. >> - >> - samsung,spi-feedback-delay: The sampling phase shift to be applied on the >> miso line (to account for any lag in the miso line). The following are the >> valid values. >> @@ -85,6 +83,7 @@ Example: >> #size-cells = <0>; >> pinctrl-names = "default"; >> pinctrl-0 = <&spi0_bus>; >> + cs-gpios = <&gpa2 5 1 0 3>; > > While at it, please change the GPIO specifier format, this one is not > valid any more. Sure, i will club it with the other comments. > >> w25q80bw@0 { >> #address-cells = <1>; >> @@ -94,7 +93,6 @@ Example: >> spi-max-frequency = <10000>; >> >> controller-data { >> - cs-gpio = <&gpa2 5 1 0 3>; >> samsung,spi-feedback-delay = <0>; >> }; >> >> diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-s3c64xx.c b/drivers/spi/spi-s3c64xx.c >> index 75a5696..4594dde 100644 >> --- a/drivers/spi/spi-s3c64xx.c >> +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-s3c64xx.c >> @@ -750,47 +750,56 @@ static int s3c64xx_spi_transfer_one(struct spi_master *master, >> } >> >> static struct s3c64xx_spi_csinfo *s3c64xx_get_slave_ctrldata( >> - struct spi_device *spi) >> + struct spi_device *spi, >> + struct s3c64xx_spi_csinfo *cs) >> { >> - struct s3c64xx_spi_csinfo *cs; >> - struct device_node *slave_np, *data_np = NULL; >> - struct s3c64xx_spi_driver_data *sdd; >> + struct device_node *data_np = NULL; >> u32 fb_delay = 0; >> >> - sdd = spi_master_get_devdata(spi->master); >> - slave_np = spi->dev.of_node; >> - if (!slave_np) { >> - dev_err(&spi->dev, "device node not found\n"); >> + data_np = of_get_child_by_name(spi->dev.of_node, "controller-data"); >> + if (!data_np) { >> + dev_err(&spi->dev, "child node 'controller-data' not found\n"); >> return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL); >> } >> >> - data_np = of_get_child_by_name(slave_np, "controller-data"); >> - if (!data_np) { >> - dev_err(&spi->dev, "child node 'controller-data' not found\n"); >> + of_property_read_u32(data_np, "samsung,spi-feedback-delay", &fb_delay); >> + cs->fb_delay = fb_delay; >> + of_node_put(data_np); >> + >> + return cs; >> +} >> + >> +static struct s3c64xx_spi_csinfo *s3c64xx_get_cs_gpios(struct spi_device *spi) >> +{ >> + struct device_node *parent_np = NULL; >> + struct s3c64xx_spi_driver_data *sdd; >> + struct s3c64xx_spi_csinfo *cs; >> + >> + parent_np = of_get_parent(spi->dev.of_node); >> + if (!parent_np) { >> + dev_err(&spi->dev, "Parent node not found\n"); >> return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL); >> } >> >> + sdd = spi_master_get_devdata(spi->master); >> + >> cs = kzalloc(sizeof(*cs), GFP_KERNEL); >> if (!cs) { >> - of_node_put(data_np); >> + of_node_put(parent_np); >> return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM); >> } >> >> /* The CS line is asserted/deasserted by the gpio pin */ >> if (sdd->cs_gpio) >> - cs->line = of_get_named_gpio(data_np, "cs-gpio", 0); >> + cs->line = of_get_named_gpio(parent_np, "cs-gpios", 0); > > Can we support both "cs-gpio" and "cs-gpios" for backward compatibility ? > After your change all DTBs using the original pattern will not work with > new kernels any more. At least I would expect such backward compatibility > maintained for few kernel releases. The reason behind removing the "cs-gpio" or not providing backward compatibility was 1. Since spi-core started using "cs-gpios" string from spi device node several months ago. The spi-s3c64xx.c driver is partially broken for more than 6 months. 2. Supporting "cs-gpio" would add extra bit of code. I've corrected the dts files that were using "cs-gpio" under "controller-data"(child node) to use "cs-gpio" from spi device node (parent node). I will make another version if you insist. > >> if (!gpio_is_valid(cs->line)) { >> dev_err(&spi->dev, "chip select gpio is not specified or invalid\n"); >> - kfree(cs); >> - of_node_put(data_np); >> + of_node_put(parent_np); >> return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL); >> } >> >> - of_property_read_u32(data_np, "samsung,spi-feedback-delay", &fb_delay); >> - cs->fb_delay = fb_delay; >> - of_node_put(data_np); >> - return cs; >> + return s3c64xx_get_slave_ctrldata(spi, cs); >> } >> >> /* >> @@ -806,9 +815,14 @@ static int s3c64xx_spi_setup(struct spi_device *spi) >> struct s3c64xx_spi_info *sci; >> int err; >> >> + if (!spi->dev.of_node) { >> + dev_err(&spi->dev, "device node not found\n"); >> + return -EINVAL; >> + } >> + >> sdd = spi_master_get_devdata(spi->master); >> if (!cs && spi->dev.of_node) { >> - cs = s3c64xx_get_slave_ctrldata(spi); >> + cs = s3c64xx_get_cs_gpios(spi); >> spi->controller_data = cs; >> } >> >> @@ -1077,7 +1091,7 @@ static int s3c64xx_spi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> sdd->sfr_start = mem_res->start; >> sdd->cs_gpio = true; >> if (pdev->dev.of_node) { >> - if (!of_find_property(pdev->dev.of_node, "cs-gpio", NULL)) >> + if (!of_find_property(pdev->dev.of_node, "cs-gpios", NULL)) >> sdd->cs_gpio = false; > > Ditto. I can do that, once we are finalized on having backward compatibility. > >> ret = of_alias_get_id(pdev->dev.of_node, "spi"); > > -- > Thanks! > Sylwester -- Shine bright, (: Nav :) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html