Hi Markus, On 07/16/2014 03:50 PM, Markus Mayer wrote: > If I may nit-pick here for a minute... > > On 11 July 2014 15:04, Suman Anna <s-anna@xxxxxx> wrote: >> Logic has been added to the OMAP2+ mailbox code to parse the >> mailbox dt nodes and construct the different sub-mailboxes >> associated with the instance. The DT representation of the >> sub-mailbox devices is different from legacy platform data >> representation to allow flexibility of interrupt configuration >> between Tx and Rx fifos (to also possibly allow simplex devices >> in the future). The DT representation gathers similar information >> that was being passed previously through the platform data, except >> for the number of fifos, interrupts and interrupt type information, >> which are gathered through driver compatible match data. >> >> The non-DT support has to be maintained for now to not break >> OMAP3 legacy boot, and the legacy-style code will be cleaned >> up once OMAP3 is also converted to DT-boot only. >> >> Cc: Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@xxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx> >> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@xxxxxx> >> --- >> drivers/mailbox/omap-mailbox.c | 156 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------- >> 1 file changed, 132 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/mailbox/omap-mailbox.c b/drivers/mailbox/omap-mailbox.c > > [...] > >> static int omap_mbox_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> { >> struct resource *mem; >> int ret; >> struct omap_mbox **list, *mbox, *mboxblk; >> struct omap_mbox_pdata *pdata = pdev->dev.platform_data; >> - struct omap_mbox_dev_info *info; >> + struct omap_mbox_dev_info *info = NULL; >> + struct omap_mbox_fifo_info *finfo, *finfoblk; >> struct omap_mbox_device *mdev; >> struct omap_mbox_fifo *fifo; >> - u32 intr_type; >> + struct device_node *node = pdev->dev.of_node; >> + struct device_node *child; >> + const struct of_device_id *match; >> + u32 intr_type, info_count; >> + u32 num_users, num_fifos; >> + u32 tmp[3]; >> u32 l; >> int i; >> >> - if (!pdata || !pdata->info_cnt || !pdata->info) { >> + if (!node && (!pdata || !pdata->info_cnt || !pdata->info)) { >> pr_err("%s: platform not supported\n", __func__); >> return -ENODEV; >> } >> >> + if (node) { > > I noticed here you are using > > if (node) > /* DT stuff goes here */ > else > /* non-DT stuff goes here */ > > but below the logic is reversed. > >> + match = of_match_device(omap_mailbox_of_match, &pdev->dev); >> + if (!match) >> + return -ENODEV; >> + intr_type = (u32)match->data; >> + >> + if (of_property_read_u32(node, "ti,mbox-num-users", >> + &num_users)) >> + return -ENODEV; >> + >> + if (of_property_read_u32(node, "ti,mbox-num-fifos", >> + &num_fifos)) >> + return -ENODEV; >> + >> + info_count = of_get_available_child_count(node); >> + if (!info_count) { >> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "no available mbox devices found\n"); >> + return -ENODEV; >> + } >> + } else { /* non-DT device creation */ >> + info_count = pdata->info_cnt; >> + info = pdata->info; >> + intr_type = pdata->intr_type; >> + num_users = pdata->num_users; >> + num_fifos = pdata->num_fifos; >> + } >> + >> + finfoblk = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, info_count * sizeof(*finfoblk), >> + GFP_KERNEL); >> + if (!finfoblk) >> + return -ENOMEM; >> + >> + finfo = finfoblk; >> + child = NULL; >> + for (i = 0; i < info_count; i++, finfo++) { >> + if (!node) { > > Here it's > if (!node) > /* non-DT stuff */ > else > /* DT stuff */ > > I think the "if (node) ..." version is a bit cleaner. Besides it's > nice if code is consistent. Do you mind changing the if statement here > so it matches the logic used above? No, not at all, I will fix this up in the next version. I have to revise the framework adaptation patches anyway (remove tidspbridge changes as that driver is getting deleted and add a missing of_node_put). Do you prefer that I split up this series between DT conversion and framework adaptation or good with posting all the patches together? If latter, I will refresh it once the v9 version of the framework comes out. regards Suman > >> + finfo->tx_id = info->tx_id; >> + finfo->rx_id = info->rx_id; >> + finfo->tx_usr = info->usr_id; >> + finfo->tx_irq = info->irq_id; >> + finfo->rx_usr = info->usr_id; >> + finfo->rx_irq = info->irq_id; >> + finfo->name = info->name; >> + info++; >> + } else { >> + child = of_get_next_available_child(node, child); >> + ret = of_property_read_u32_array(child, "ti,mbox-tx", >> + tmp, ARRAY_SIZE(tmp)); >> + if (ret) >> + return ret; >> + finfo->tx_id = tmp[0]; >> + finfo->tx_irq = tmp[1]; >> + finfo->tx_usr = tmp[2]; >> + >> + ret = of_property_read_u32_array(child, "ti,mbox-rx", >> + tmp, ARRAY_SIZE(tmp)); >> + if (ret) >> + return ret; >> + finfo->rx_id = tmp[0]; >> + finfo->rx_irq = tmp[1]; >> + finfo->rx_usr = tmp[2]; >> + >> + finfo->name = child->name; >> + } >> + if (finfo->tx_id >= num_fifos || finfo->rx_id >= num_fifos || >> + finfo->tx_usr >= num_users || finfo->rx_usr >= num_users) >> + return -EINVAL; >> + } >> + -- 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