Hi Johan,
>>>> This patch allows SerDev module to manage serial devices declared as
>>>> attached to an UART in ACPI table.
>>>>
>>>> acpi_serdev_add_device() callback will only take into account entries
>>>> without enumerated flag set. This flags is set for all entries during
>>>> ACPI scan, except for SPI and I2C serial devices, and for UART with
>>>> 2nd patch in the series.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Frédéric Danis <frederic.danis.oss@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/tty/serdev/core.c | 99 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>>>> 1 file changed, 94 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/tty/serdev/core.c b/drivers/tty/serdev/core.c
>>>> index c68fb3a..104777d 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/tty/serdev/core.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/tty/serdev/core.c
>
>>>> +static int acpi_serdev_register_devices(struct serdev_controller *ctrl)
>>>> +{
>>>> + acpi_status status;
>>>> + acpi_handle handle;
>>>> +
>>>> + handle = ACPI_HANDLE(ctrl->dev.parent);
>>>> + if (!handle)
>>>> + return -ENODEV;
>>>> +
>>>> + status = acpi_walk_namespace(ACPI_TYPE_DEVICE, handle, 1,
>>>> + acpi_serdev_add_device, NULL, ctrl, NULL);
>>>> + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
>>>> + dev_warn(&ctrl->dev, "failed to enumerate Serial slaves\n");
>>>
>>> s/Serial/serdev/
>>>
>>>> + return -ENODEV;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + return 0;
>>>
>>> What if there are no slaves defined? I'm not very familiar with the ACPI
>>> helpers, but from a quick look it seems you'd then end up returning zero
>>> here which would cause the serdev controller to be registered instead of
>>> the tty-class device.
>>>
>>> [ And if I'm mistaken, you do want to suppress that error message for
>>> when there are no slaves defined. ]
>
>>>> - ret = of_serdev_register_devices(ctrl);
>>>> - if (ret)
>>>> + ret_of = of_serdev_register_devices(ctrl);
>>>> + ret_acpi = acpi_serdev_register_devices(ctrl);
>>>> + if (ret_of && ret_acpi) {
>>>> + dev_dbg(&ctrl->dev, "serdev%d no devices registered: of:%d acpi:%d\n",
>>>
>>> "serdev%d" is redundant here as you're using dev_dbg (which will print
>>> the device name).
>>>
>>>> + ctrl->nr, ret_of, ret_acpi);
>>>> + ret = -ENODEV;
>>>> goto out_dev_del;
>>>> + }
>>>>
>>>> dev_dbg(&ctrl->dev, "serdev%d registered: dev:%p\n",
>>>> ctrl->nr, &ctrl->dev);
>>>
>>> Hmm, I see it's already used here. No need to follow that example
>>> though.
>>
>> lets have an extra patch on top of it that fixes these.
>
> Some of the above are minor nits that can be addressed by a follow-up
> patch indeed, but the handling of nodes with no child devices needs to
> be correct (or you could end up breaking normal serial-port support).
that sounds good to me as well. Lets get this feature into the ACPI tree since I am going to push Hans’ patches into bluetooth-next as soon as he re-submits the missing ID change. That hopefully gives us then fully serdev support for ACPI and DT when it comes to Broadcom Bluetooth controllers.
Next step is to convert the Intel driver to also use ACPI based serdev :)
And for the brave, I think there are Realtek based systems using ACPI as well.
What I was wondering the other day is if we need a lsserdev tool or some integration in lshw to be able to debug what serdev devices and ID are present. The lsusb and /sys/kernel/debug/usb/devices is just super powerful and easy when it comes to figuring out what people have in their system. Maybe /sys/kernel/debug/serdev/devices could be helpful as well. Just thinking out loud here.
Regards
Marcel
--
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
