On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 10:54 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 04, 2014 05:06:40 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Tuesday, November 04, 2014 02:48:40 PM Grant Likely wrote:
>> > On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 9:52 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > > On Monday, November 03, 2014 04:25:08 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> > >> On Sunday, November 02, 2014 08:49:37 PM Darren Hart wrote:
>> > >> >
>> > >> > On 11/1/14 4:11, Grant Likely wrote:
>> > >> > > On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 22:59:57 +0100
>> > >> > > , "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > >> > > wrote:
>> > >> > >> On Tuesday, October 28, 2014 01:15:27 PM Mika Westerberg wrote:
>> > >> > >>> acpi_dev_add_driver_gpios() makes it possible to set up mapping between
>> > >> > >>> properties and ACPI GpioIo resources in a driver, so we can take index
>> > >> > >>> parameter in acpi_find_gpio() into use with _DSD device properties now.
>> > >> > >>>
>> > >> > >>> This index can be used to select a GPIO from a property with multiple
>> > >> > >>> GPIOs:
>> > >> > >>>
>> > >> > >>> Package () {
>> > >> > >>> "data-gpios",
>> > >> > >>> Package () {
>> > >> > >>> \_SB.GPIO, 0, 0, 0,
>> > >> > >>> \_SB.GPIO, 1, 0, 0,
>> > >> > >>> \_SB.GPIO, 2, 0, 1,
>> > >> > >>> }
>> > >> > >>> }
>> > >> > >>>
>> > >> > >>> In order to retrieve the last GPIO from a driver we can simply do:
>> > >> > >>>
>> > >> > >>> desc = devm_gpiod_get_index(dev, "data", 2);
>> > >> > >>>
>> > >> > >>> and so on.
>> > >> > >>>
>> > >> > >>> Signed-off-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > >> > >>
>> > >> > >> Cool. :-)
>> > >> > >>
>> > >> > >> Any objections anyone?
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > Actually, I do. Not in the idea, but in the implementation. The way this gets encoded:
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > Package () {
>> > >> > > \_SB.GPIO, 0, 0, 0,
>> > >> > > \_SB.GPIO, 1, 0, 0,
>> > >> > > \_SB.GPIO, 2, 0, 1,
>> > >> > > }
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > Means that decoding each GPIO tuple requires the length of a tuple to be
>> > >> > > fixed, or to implement a DT-like #gpio-cells. If it is fixed, then there
>> > >> > > is no way to expand the binding later. Can this be done in the following
>> > >> > > way instead?
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > Package () {
>> > >> > > Package () { \_SB.GPIO, 0, 0, 0 },
>> > >> > > Package () { \_SB.GPIO, 1, 0, 0 },
>> > >> > > Package () { \_SB.GPIO, 2, 0, 1 },
>> > >> > > }
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > This is one of the biggest pains in device tree. We don't have any way
>> > >> > > to group tuples so it requires looking up stuff across the tree to
>> > >> > > figure out how to parse each multi-item property.
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > I know that last year we talked about how bios vendors would get
>> > >> > > complicated properties wrong, but I think there is little risk in this
>> > >> > > case. If the property is encoded wrong, the driver simply won't work and
>> > >> > > it is unlikely to get shipped before being fixed.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > This particular nesting of Packages is expressly prohibited by the
>> > >> > Device Properties UUID for the reasons you mention.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > http://www.uefi.org/sites/default/files/resources/_DSD-device-properties-UUID.pdf
>> > >>
>> > >> Also we don't use properties where single name is assigned to multiple GPIOs
>> > >> anywhere in the current device-properties patchset, so this is not relevant at
>> > >> the moment.
>> > >>
>> > >> Moreover, even if we were to use them, we would need to ensure that this:
>> > >>
>> > >> Package () {
>> > >> \_SB.GPIO, 0, 0, 0
>> > >> }
>> > >>
>> > >> was equivalent to
>> > >>
>> > >> Package () {
>> > >> Package () { \_SB.GPIO, 0, 0, 0 }
>> > >> }
>> > >>
>> > >> This is not impossible to do and I suppose we could even explain that in the
>> > >> implementation guide document in a sensible way, but that would require the
>> > >> document linked above to be changed first and *then* we can think about writing
>> > >> kernel code to it. Not the other way around, please.
>> > >>
>> > >> So Grant, do you want us to proceed with that?
>> > >
>> > > Before you reply, one more observation that seems to be relevant.
>> > >
>> > > In ACPI, both this:
>> > >
>> > > Package () {
>> > > \_SB.GPIO, 0, 0, 0,
>> > > \_SB.GPIO, 1, 0, 0,
>> > > \_SB.GPIO, 2, 0, 1,
>> > > }
>> > >
>> > > and this:
>> > >
>> > > Package () {
>> > > Package () { \_SB.GPIO, 0, 0, 0 },
>> > > Package () { \_SB.GPIO, 1, 0, 0 },
>> > > Package () { \_SB.GPIO, 2, 0, 1 },
>> > > }
>> > >
>> > > carry the same information, because every element of a package has a type,
>> > > so there is no danger of confusing an ACPI_TYPE_LOCAL_REFERENCE with
>> > > ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER. Thus one can easily count the number of GPIOs represented
>> > > by the first package by counting the number of reference elements in it.
>> > > The second one has more structure which in this particular case is arguably
>> > > redundant.
>> >
>> > Okay, this make sense. I'm okay with this approach, and I would
>> > recommend making that the only valid method for parsing in
>> > acpi_dev_get_property_reference(). Get rid of the *size_prop argument
>> > so that it always behaves the same way and users aren't tempted to do
>> > something clever.
>>
>> OK, I'll send a followup patch to remove the size_prop arg from
>> acpi_dev_get_property_reference().
>
> This:
>
> ---
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: ACPI / property: Drop size_prop from acpi_dev_get_property_reference()
>
> The size_prop argument of the recently added function
> acpi_dev_get_property_reference() is not used by the only current
> caller of that function and is very unlikely to be used at any time
> going forward.
>
> Namely, for a property whose value is a list of items each containing
> a references to a device object possibly accompanied by some integers,
> the number of items in the list can always be computed as the number
> of elements of type ACPI_TYPE_LOCAL_REFERENCE in the property package.
> Thus it should never be necessary to provide an additional "cells"
> property with a value equal to the number of items in that list.
>
> For this reason, drop the size_prop argument from
> acpi_dev_get_property_reference() and update its caller accordingly.
Beautiful.
Acked-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=141511255610556&w=2
> Suggested-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>
> On top of
>
> http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git/log/?h=device-properties
>
> ---
> drivers/acpi/property.c | 62 +++++++++++---------------------------------
> drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c | 2 -
> include/linux/acpi.h | 4 +-
> 3 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 49 deletions(-)
>
> Index: linux-pm/drivers/acpi/property.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/acpi/property.c
> +++ linux-pm/drivers/acpi/property.c
> @@ -273,25 +273,21 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(acpi_dev_get_property_
> * acpi_dev_get_property_reference - returns handle to the referenced object
> * @adev: ACPI device to get property
> * @name: Name of the property
> - * @size_prop: Name of the "size" property in referenced object
> * @index: Index of the reference to return
> * @args: Location to store the returned reference with optional arguments
> *
> * Find property with @name, verifify that it is a package containing at least
> * one object reference and if so, store the ACPI device object pointer to the
> - * target object in @args->adev.
> + * target object in @args->adev. If the reference includes arguments, store
> + * them in the @args->args[] array.
> *
> - * If the reference includes arguments (@size_prop is not %NULL) follow the
> - * reference and check whether or not there is an integer property @size_prop
> - * under the target object and if so, whether or not its value matches the
> - * number of arguments that follow the reference. If there's more than one
> - * reference in the property value package, @index is used to select the one to
> - * return.
> + * If there's more than one reference in the property value package, @index is
> + * used to select the one to return.
> *
> * Return: %0 on success, negative error code on failure.
> */
> -int acpi_dev_get_property_reference(struct acpi_device *adev, const char *name,
> - const char *size_prop, size_t index,
> +int acpi_dev_get_property_reference(struct acpi_device *adev,
> + const char *name, size_t index,
> struct acpi_reference_args *args)
> {
> const union acpi_object *element, *end;
> @@ -308,7 +304,7 @@ int acpi_dev_get_property_reference(stru
> * return that reference then.
> */
> if (obj->type == ACPI_TYPE_LOCAL_REFERENCE) {
> - if (size_prop || index)
> + if (index)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> ret = acpi_bus_get_device(obj->reference.handle, &device);
> @@ -348,42 +344,16 @@ int acpi_dev_get_property_reference(stru
> element++;
> nargs = 0;
>
> - if (size_prop) {
> - const union acpi_object *prop;
> -
> - /*
> - * Find out how many arguments the refenced object
> - * expects by reading its size_prop property.
> - */
> - ret = acpi_dev_get_property(device, size_prop,
> - ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER, &prop);
> - if (ret)
> - return ret;
> -
> - nargs = prop->integer.value;
> - if (nargs > MAX_ACPI_REFERENCE_ARGS
> - || element + nargs > end)
> + /* assume following integer elements are all args */
> + for (i = 0; element + i < end; i++) {
> + int type = element[i].type;
> +
> + if (type == ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER)
> + nargs++;
> + else if (type == ACPI_TYPE_LOCAL_REFERENCE)
> + break;
> + else
> return -EPROTO;
> -
> - /*
> - * Skip to the start of the arguments and verify
> - * that they all are in fact integers.
> - */
> - for (i = 0; i < nargs; i++)
> - if (element[i].type != ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER)
> - return -EPROTO;
> - } else {
> - /* assume following integer elements are all args */
> - for (i = 0; element + i < end; i++) {
> - int type = element[i].type;
> -
> - if (type == ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER)
> - nargs++;
> - else if (type == ACPI_TYPE_LOCAL_REFERENCE)
> - break;
> - else
> - return -EPROTO;
> - }
> }
>
> if (idx++ == index) {
> Index: linux-pm/include/linux/acpi.h
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-pm.orig/include/linux/acpi.h
> +++ linux-pm/include/linux/acpi.h
> @@ -718,8 +718,8 @@ int acpi_dev_get_property(struct acpi_de
> int acpi_dev_get_property_array(struct acpi_device *adev, const char *name,
> acpi_object_type type,
> const union acpi_object **obj);
> -int acpi_dev_get_property_reference(struct acpi_device *adev, const char *name,
> - const char *cells_name, size_t index,
> +int acpi_dev_get_property_reference(struct acpi_device *adev,
> + const char *name, size_t index,
> struct acpi_reference_args *args);
>
> int acpi_dev_prop_get(struct acpi_device *adev, const char *propname,
> Index: linux-pm/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c
> +++ linux-pm/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c
> @@ -405,7 +405,7 @@ struct gpio_desc *acpi_get_gpiod_by_inde
> dev_dbg(&adev->dev, "GPIO: looking up %s\n", propname);
>
> memset(&args, 0, sizeof(args));
> - ret = acpi_dev_get_property_reference(adev, propname, NULL,
> + ret = acpi_dev_get_property_reference(adev, propname,
> index, &args);
> if (ret) {
> bool found = acpi_get_driver_gpio_data(adev, propname,
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
