On 2022-11-12 16:27:19, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Nov 2022 21:24:45 +0100
> Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Adding Krzysztof to CC for the DT bindings discussion.
> >
> > On 2022-11-06 20:30:18, Marijn Suijten wrote:
> > > Much like the ADC5 driver iio_chan_spec::extend_name has to be set for
> > > friendly/useful names to show up in sysfs, allowing users to correlate
> > > readout values with the corresponding probe. This name is read from
> > > firmware, taking both the node name and - if set - node label into
> > > account. This is particularly useful for custom thermistors being
> > > attached to otherwise-generically-named GPIOs.
> > >
>
> If you are attaching thermistors to an ADC channel, then you should have
> a driver for that thermistor. It will be a consumer of the ADC channel
> in question and any labels etc should apply there (along with scaling
> / non linear transforms to get to a temperature), not at the ADC
> level.
This is what happens in the ADC5 driver, though. In /sys/bus/iio names
show up for ADC channels that aren't otherwise consumed by (thermistor)
drivers. There are also voltage readings. The IIO driver seems to be
aware of both the unit and (linear iirc) scaling.
> > > Signed-off-by: Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > ---
> > >
> > > This RFC may seem a bit controversial as there are multiple patches
> > > going around in DT-land changing how nodes are labeled [1] (or
> > > introducing new ones: [2]), seemingly to appease binding conventions
> > > without considering how the driver propagates them to IIO (and in turn
> > > what userspace sees in sysfs). I hope we can put together the right
> > > conventions with this RFC.
>
> > >
> > > Before getting started, note that ADC5 provides this DT/FW node
> > > name/label in *both* extend_name *and* datasheet_name;
> > > adc5_channels::datasheet_name provided by the macros remains *unread*
> > > (except for a non-null check).
>
> There was some history here if I recall correctly. Until recently(ish) we didn't
> have the "label" attribute for channels so the only route was to use
> extended_name. That makes a mess for userspace developers however because
> it is harder to write a parser that is happy with free form sections
> of an attribute name. So extended_name is more or less deprecated with the
> exception of a few legacy cases that we might carry forwards into very similar
> drivers.
Making sure we're talking about the same thing: it's extend_name, not
extendED_name.
> datasheet_name was introduced to allow binding the channels to consumers
> in a human readable form. Note that this dates back to predevice tree
> days - so mostly you'll see it used when an mfd registers its own
> consumers. They weren't at the time intended to be used directly by the
> drivers at all.
It is unfortunate that I don't see these in sysfs then; vadc only
assigns datasheet_name but not extend_name.
> > > Since the names hardcoded in the driver seem to be somewhat
> > > "datasheet"-y, and the names in DT typically take the form of a more
> > > friendly "<device>-therm" indicating where the thermistor (or voltage
> > > probe) is located on the board or attached to, I have opted to persist
> > > the original use of vadc_channels::datasheet_name in
> > > iio_chan_spec::datasheet_name, and only propagate the data from DT/FW
> > > into extend_name.
>
> To clarify datasheet_name is the name on the datasheet of the provider part
> not the naming on the board datasheet - basically it's meant to be the pin name.
Right; it may not have come across but that is what I assumed (datsheet
name of the part, which would be the names hardcoded in the adc5/vadc
driver), and then have the labels - assigned in /board/ dts specialize
that where it is not a hardwired reading within the part.
> If you modify extend_name at all you break userspace ABI.
> So that's pretty much a non starter (and one reason why we added the label
> attribute).
The sysfs filenames will change, but they currently don't carry an
in_{voltage,temp}X_label attribute. Only when I set extend_name to
something sensible. But then X changes from an index to that same name
too.
Note that this is already the case for ADC5.
> Also, if the ADC channel is labelled with what it is consumed by that feels
> backwards. The thermistor could be connected to any channel. Any nice
> naming should be at the thermistor driver end. So say I put a thermistor
> on input 8. It should just bind to input 8. The bit of the binding for
> the ADC just provides the consumer services for that input 8.
This is how these drivers are describing their channels though, except
for a few freely assignable GPIO channels?
> > > (We should likely rename vadc_channel_prop::datasheet_name to
> > > extend_name to this end.)
> > >
> > > Back when I submitted patches for pm6125 [3] (utilizing ADC5)
> > > 4f47a236a23d ("iio: adc: qcom-spmi-adc5: convert to device properties")
> > > didn't yet land, and these patches use the node name to convey a
> > > useful/friendly name (again, the string literals in ADC5 are unused).
> > > fwnode_get_name() however includes the `@xx` reg suffix, making for an
> > > unpleasant reading experience in sysfs.
> > >
> > > With all that context in mind, I feel like we should answer the
> > > following questions:
> > >
> > > 1. Should we propagate names from DT/FW at all?
>
> This question needs to make it clear - which name? Propagating channel
> labels to sysfs is often useful via the in_voltageX_label type attributes.
Note that X here gets replaced by the value of extend_name, it seems.
> Whether it is useful in this specific driver depends on whether we have
> information to convey that isn't provided by channel numbers alone.
The driver contains channel names for the purpose of clarifying what the
channel is, which isn't easily deducible (nor very user-friendly) when
only having access to channel indices/numbers.
> > > 2. If so, how should a node be represented in DT? Should it use generic
> > > node names (which we might not want to use anyway considering the
> > > `@xx` suffix highlighted above) or labels exclusively?
>
> I would suggest only labels.
Ack, the node name is a mess nowadays. That means ADC5 shouldn't use it
as fallback either when a DT label is not set (and instead use the
currently-unused adc5_channels::datasheet_name field).
Can I remove it (use of fwnode_get_name() as datasheet_name)?
> Though in the case you give of a thermistor attached
> this handling is wrong anyway.
Not sure I follow you here. The driver defines when a channel is a
thermistor or a voltage, and even gives it a name/label. The values are
readable through /sys/bus/iio. Not sure if they're all correct
readings, and some (but not all) are later routed into a "thermal
manager", but having at least a _label for these would be useful.
> > > 3. If only labels are going to be used in conjunction with generic node
> > > names, should ADC5 be changed to ignore the node name?
>
> From a quick search, I'm only seeing the node name used in debug prints currently.
> That feels fine to me as it's telling us where the binding parsing went wrong...
> Am I missing some use outside of vadc_get_fw_channel_data()?
That's the VADC driver. Look at adc5_get_fw_channel_data, specifically
where it calls fwnode_property_read_string() to overwrite
prop->datasheet_name.
> > > 4. If a label (or node name) is not set, do we fall back to
> > > datasheet_name hardcoded in the driver?
>
> Hmm. Probably not.
Then we might as well remove this useless data from the kernel driver
altogether...
> > > 5. What do we use for datasheet_name vs extend_name?
> Expand that to include label.
> datasheet_name : When you want to have human readable pin names from the ADC
> datasheet, used as part of provide services to consumer drivers. Doesn't
> work with DT though as it wasn't part of the binding for consumers.
> So largely irrelevant unless you have an MFD where the ADC consumers are
> also part of the MFD children and so the map is set up in the way we used
> to do it for board files.
... or this could remain to feed into datasheet_name?
> extended_name: Short answer is don't use it today. It was a bad design decision
> a long time back.
> label: This is the one you should info from DT through to today. As it is freeform
> and comes from the bindings - we don't encode this in the const iio_chan_spec array
> but rather use the iio_info->read_label() callback. It is provided to userspace
> as a per channel _label attribute.
Thanks, I have been looking for this and scanning through
iio_read_channel_label() now. It'll use ->read_label() and only defer
to extend_name if the getter isn't available.
I'll insert a getter here in the vadc driver that returns the DT label
if set, otherwise the hardcoded driver name (which'll still feed into
iio_chan_spec::datasheet_name).
Do we then remove extend_name from qcom-spmi-adc5 and give it the same
treatment, since it would now use DT node names as filenames unless a
label is set? I can only imagine it having been set because the ADC5
author(s) didn't see a name nor label in sysfs either, without knowing
about the existence of read_label.
> > > 6. Any other vadc drivers that need the same treatment, when we come to
> > > a resolution?
> Any resolution can only 'add' ABI to userspace. So adding labels is fine.
> extend_name never is.
Saying the above in a different way: would removing extend_name
assignment from qcom-spmi-adc5 be fine?
> Hope that helps.
A lot, now knowing that read_label is the part of the puzzle I
previously missed. Thanks!
- Marijn
