On 28 July 2015 at 15:39, Rob Herring <robherring2@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 8:19 AM, Tomeu Vizoso
> <tomeu.vizoso@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> From an arbitrary node in the tree, find the enclosing node that
>> corresponds to a platform device, as registered by
>> of_platform_populate().
>>
>> This can be used to find out what device needs to be probed so the
>> dependency described by a given node is made available.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>
>> Changes in v2:
>> - Move the logic for finding a platform device from its firmware node to
>> of/platform.c as it's not needed for ACPI nodes.
>>
>> drivers/of/platform.c | 60 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> include/linux/of_platform.h | 1 +
>> 2 files changed, 61 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/of/platform.c b/drivers/of/platform.c
>> index ff27494cda8c..89c5cd513027 100644
>> --- a/drivers/of/platform.c
>> +++ b/drivers/of/platform.c
>> @@ -501,6 +501,66 @@ void of_platform_depopulate(struct device *parent)
>> }
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(of_platform_depopulate);
>>
>> +static bool of_is_platform(struct device_node *np)
>> +{
>> + int count;
>> +
>> + count = of_property_count_strings(np, "compatible");
>> +
>> + /* The node has to have a compatible string */
>> + if (!count)
>> + return false;
>> +
>> + /* But it cannot be just a simple memory-mapped bus */
>> + if (count == 1 && of_match_node(of_default_bus_match_table, np))
>> + return false;
>> +
>> + /* But AMBA devices aren't platform devices */
>> + if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "arm,primecell"))
>> + return false;
>> +
>> + /* Node is immediately below root */
>> + if (!np->parent || !np->parent->parent)
>> + return true;
>> +
>> + /* If it's a node in a simple memory-mapped bus */
>> + if (of_match_node(of_default_bus_match_table, np->parent))
>> + return true;
>
> This seems really fragile.
I think this finding logic matches the logic for registering platform
devices in of_platform_populate and also what is documented in
Documentation/devicetree/usage-model.txt.
> What about platform devices which are
> children of MFDs but are not "simple-mfd"?
This code should deal fine with those (the boards I tested with do
have them). It probes the mfd master, and that in turn will call
mfd_add_devices causing the target device to be probed.
> Does of_find_device_by_node not work for you?
Well, the dependencies aren't always platform devices, that's why I
need to go up the tree until I find a node that corresponds to a
platform device that I can query and probe.
If I had a way to get, say, a i2c device from its fwnode then I would
just need to make sure that a device's parent is probed before probing
it and everything would be cleaner in the OF case.
> That is probably not the
> most efficient search, but we could fix that. We could add struct
> device ptr to struct device_node and check without searching for
> example.
That would be great, but I thought there was an issue with a OF node
being able to be related to more than one struct device (but I haven't
found this myself yet).
Thanks,
Tomeu
> Rob
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--
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
