On 2022-11-14 at 17:17:06 -0800, Russ Weight wrote:
>
>
> On 11/13/22 17:58, Xu Yilun wrote:
> > On 2022-11-11 at 13:49:38 +0200, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> >> On Fri, 11 Nov 2022, Xu Yilun wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 2022-11-08 at 16:42:55 +0200, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> >>>> BMC type specific info is currently set by a switch/case block. The
> >>>> size of this info is expected to grow as more dev types and features
> >>>> are added which would have made the switch block bloaty.
> >>>>
> >>>> Store type specific info into struct and place them into .driver_data
> >>>> instead because it makes things a bit cleaner.
> >>>>
> >>>> Reviewed-by: Russ Weight <russell.h.weight@xxxxxxxxx>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> drivers/mfd/intel-m10-bmc.c | 50 +++++++++++++++++--------------
> >>>> include/linux/mfd/intel-m10-bmc.h | 14 +++++++++
> >>>> 2 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/intel-m10-bmc.c b/drivers/mfd/intel-m10-bmc.c
> >>>> index ee167c5dcd29..762808906380 100644
> >>>> --- a/drivers/mfd/intel-m10-bmc.c
> >>>> +++ b/drivers/mfd/intel-m10-bmc.c
> >>>> @@ -156,15 +156,17 @@ static int check_m10bmc_version(struct intel_m10bmc *ddata)
> >>>> static int intel_m10_bmc_spi_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
> >>>> {
> >>>> const struct spi_device_id *id = spi_get_device_id(spi);
> >>>> + const struct intel_m10bmc_platform_info *info;
> >>>> struct device *dev = &spi->dev;
> >>>> - struct mfd_cell *cells;
> >>>> struct intel_m10bmc *ddata;
> >>>> - int ret, n_cell;
> >>>> + int ret;
> >>>>
> >>>> ddata = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*ddata), GFP_KERNEL);
> >>>> if (!ddata)
> >>>> return -ENOMEM;
> >>>>
> >>>> + info = (struct intel_m10bmc_platform_info *)id->driver_data;
> >>>> + ddata->info = info;
> >>> Where to use the ddata->info?
> >> In patch 5/12 there are many these constructs:
> >> const struct m10bmc_csr_map *csr_map = sec->m10bmc->info->csr_map;
> >>
> >> Now that I look though, this particular line is altered by the split patch
> >> 4/12 so it would be not strictly necessary to do it here. I'd prefer,
> >> however, still to add it here even if it's technically not used until
> >> after the split 5/12 patch because it very much logically belongs to this
> >> change.
> > It's good to me.
> >
> >>>> ddata->dev = dev;
> >>>>
> >>>> ddata->regmap =
> >>>> @@ -183,24 +185,8 @@ static int intel_m10_bmc_spi_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
> >>>> return ret;
> >>>> }
> >>>>
> >>>> - switch (id->driver_data) {
> >>>> - case M10_N3000:
> >>>> - cells = m10bmc_pacn3000_subdevs;
> >>>> - n_cell = ARRAY_SIZE(m10bmc_pacn3000_subdevs);
> >>>> - break;
> >>>> - case M10_D5005:
> >>>> - cells = m10bmc_d5005_subdevs;
> >>>> - n_cell = ARRAY_SIZE(m10bmc_d5005_subdevs);
> >>>> - break;
> >>>> - case M10_N5010:
> >>>> - cells = m10bmc_n5010_subdevs;
> >>>> - n_cell = ARRAY_SIZE(m10bmc_n5010_subdevs);
> >>>> - break;
> >>>> - default:
> >>>> - return -ENODEV;
> >>>> - }
> >>>> -
> >>>> - ret = devm_mfd_add_devices(dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO, cells, n_cell,
> >>>> + ret = devm_mfd_add_devices(dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO,
> >>>> + info->cells, info->n_cells,
> >>>> NULL, 0, NULL);
> >>>> if (ret)
> >>>> dev_err(dev, "Failed to register sub-devices: %d\n", ret);
> >>>> @@ -208,10 +194,28 @@ static int intel_m10_bmc_spi_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
> >>>> return ret;
> >>>> }
> >>>>
> >>>> +static const struct intel_m10bmc_platform_info m10bmc_m10_n3000 = {
> >>>> + .type = M10_N3000,
> >>> Is the type enum still useful? Found no usage.
> >> There's no use within context of this patch series. However, I think there
> >> might have been something depending on it in the changes that are not part
> >> of this series so I left it in place for now.
> > I'm not sure how it would be used later. This patch is to eliminate the
> > "switch (board type) case" block, but similar code is still to be added
> > later?
>
> Unfortunately, these will be needed later. Consider the following (future)
> function that has to account for a field that was moved from one register
> to another:
>
> static int
> m10bmc_sec_status(struct m10bmc_sec *sec, u32 *status)
> {
> u32 reg_offset, reg_value;
> int ret;
>
> reg_offset = (sec->type == N6000BMC_SEC) ?
> auth_result_reg(sec->m10bmc) : doorbell_reg(sec->m10bmc);
>
> ret = m10bmc_sys_read(sec->m10bmc, reg_offset, ®_value);
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> *status = rsu_stat(reg_value);
>
> return 0;
> }
>
> With this patch-set, most conditionals are removed, but there will still
> be some cases where it is needed. If you prefer, we could wait and add
Why this condition can't be handled in the same manner? I actually hope
all board type difference been handled in the same way, either by the
core mfd driver or each subdev driver, but not a mix of the two.
Thanks,
Yilun
> the type in when we are ready to use it.
>
> - Russ
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Yilun
>
