On 02/06/2013 02:48 PM, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
On 02/06/2013 09:03 AM, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
This patch adds device tree parsing for gpio_ir_recv platform_data and
the mandatory binding documentation. It basically follows what we already
have for e.g. gpio_keys. All required device tree properties are OS
independent but optional properties allow linux specific support for rc
protocols and maps.
There was a similar patch sent by Matus Ujhelyi but that discussion
died after the first reviews.
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Hesselbarth<sebastian.hesselbarth@xxxxxxxxx>
---
...
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/gpio-ir-receiver.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/gpio-ir-receiver.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..937760c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/gpio-ir-receiver.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
+Device-Tree bindings for GPIO IR receiver
+
+Required properties:
+ - compatible = "gpio-ir-receiver";
+ - gpios: OF device-tree gpio specification.
+
+Optional properties:
+ - linux,allowed-rc-protocols: Linux specific u64 bitmask of allowed
+ rc protocols.
You likely need to specify in these bindings documentation which bit
corresponds to which RC protocol.
I'm not very familiar with the RC internals, but why it has to be
specified statically in the device tree, when decoding seems to be
mostly software defined ? I might be missing something though..
Sylwester,
I am not familiar with RC internals either. Maybe somebody with more
insight in media/rc can clarify the specific needs for the rc subsystem.
I was just transferring the DT support approach taken by gpio_keys to
gpio_ir_recv as I will be using it on mach-dove/cubox soon.
Couldn't this be configured at run time, with all protocols allowed
as the default ?
Actually, this is how the internal rc code works. If there is nothing
defined for allowed_protocols it assumes that all protocols are supported.
That is why above node properties are optional.
About the binding documentation of allowed_protocols, rc_map, or the
default behavior of current linux code, I don't think they will stay
in-sync for long. I'd rather completely remove those os-specific properties
from DT, but that hits the above statement about the needs of media/rc
subsystem.
+ - linux,rc-map-name: Linux specific remote control map name.
+
+Example node:
+
+ ir: ir-receiver {
+ compatible = "gpio-ir-receiver";
+ gpios =<&gpio0 19 1>;
+ /* allow rc protocols 1-4 */
+ linux,allowed-rc-protocols =<0x00000000 0x0000001e>;
+ linux,rc-map-name = "rc-rc6-mce";
+ };
diff --git a/drivers/media/rc/gpio-ir-recv.c b/drivers/media/rc/gpio-ir-recv.c
index 4f71a7d..25e09fa 100644
--- a/drivers/media/rc/gpio-ir-recv.c
+++ b/drivers/media/rc/gpio-ir-recv.c
@@ -16,6 +16,7 @@
#include<linux/interrupt.h>
#include<linux/gpio.h>
#include<linux/slab.h>
+#include<linux/of_gpio.h>
#include<linux/platform_device.h>
#include<linux/irq.h>
#include<media/rc-core.h>
@@ -30,6 +31,63 @@ struct gpio_rc_dev {
bool active_low;
};
+#ifdef CONFIG_OF
+/*
+ * Translate OpenFirmware node properties into platform_data
+ */
+static struct gpio_ir_recv_platform_data *
+gpio_ir_recv_get_devtree_pdata(struct device *dev)
+{
+ struct device_node *np = dev->of_node;
+ struct gpio_ir_recv_platform_data *pdata;
+ enum of_gpio_flags flags;
+ int gpio;
+
+ if (!np)
+ return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
+
+ pdata = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*pdata), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!pdata)
+ return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
+
+ if (!of_find_property(np, "gpios", NULL)) {
Why do you need this ? Isn't of_get_gpio_flags() sufficient ?
Ok. Now that you point at it, I agree that this check and the error
below is not needed. It is in gpio_keys, so that explains why it also
moved in here.
+ dev_err(dev, "Found gpio-ir-receiver without gpios\n");
+ return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
+ }
+
+ gpio = of_get_gpio_flags(np, 0,&flags);
+ if (gpio< 0) {
+ if (gpio != -EPROBE_DEFER)
+ dev_err(dev, "Failed to get gpio flags, error: %d\n",
+ gpio);
+ return ERR_PTR(gpio);
+ }
+
+ pdata->gpio_nr = gpio;
+ pdata->active_low = (flags& OF_GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW) ? true : false;
+ pdata->map_name = of_get_property(np, "linux,rc-map-name", NULL);
+ of_property_read_u64(np, "linux,allowed-rc-protocols",
+ &pdata->allowed_protos);
+
+ return pdata;
+}
+
+static struct of_device_id gpio_ir_recv_of_match[] = {
+ { .compatible = "gpio-ir-receiver", },
+ { },
+};
+MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, gpio_ir_recv_of_match);
+
+#else /* !CONFIG_OF */
+
+static inline struct gpio_ir_recv_platform_data *
+gpio_ir_recv_get_devtree_pdata(struct device *dev)
+{
+ return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
+}
+
+#endif
+
static irqreturn_t gpio_ir_recv_irq(int irq, void *dev_id)
{
struct gpio_rc_dev *gpio_dev = dev_id;
@@ -66,8 +124,11 @@ static int gpio_ir_recv_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
pdev->dev.platform_data;
int rc;
- if (!pdata)
- return -EINVAL;
+ if (!pdata) {
+ pdata = gpio_ir_recv_get_devtree_pdata(&pdev->dev);
Could assigning to pdev->dev.platform_data be avoided here ?
platform_data is only referenced in probe(), so maybe something like
this would be better:
const struct gpio_ir_recv_platform_data *pdata = NULL;
if (pdev->dev.of_node) {
ret = gpio_ir_recv_parse_dt(&pdev->dev,&pdata);
if (ret< 0)
return ret;
} else {
pdata = pdev->dev.platform_data;
}
if (!pdata)
return -EINVAL;
Actually, I am not assigning the parsed gpio_ir_recv_platform_data to
pdev->dev.platform_data but pdata ptr instead. Either I don't see the
difference in pointer assignments between your code and mine or you
were mislead from struct gpio_ir_recv_platform_data above.
Anyway, I agree to test for pdev->dev.of_node and call gpio_ir_recv_parse_dt
if set.
+ if (IS_ERR(pdata))
+ return PTR_ERR(pdata);
+ }
if (pdata->gpio_nr< 0)
return -EINVAL;
@@ -195,6 +256,9 @@ static struct platform_driver gpio_ir_recv_driver = {
#ifdef CONFIG_PM
.pm =&gpio_ir_recv_pm_ops,
#endif
+#ifdef CONFIG_OF
+ .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(gpio_ir_recv_of_match),
+#endif
There is not need for #ifdef here, of_match_ptr() macro was introduced
just to allow to omit #ifdefs.
Ok, I will change that.
Thanks for the review!
Sebastian
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
