Hi Scott, Thanks for your review :) See my comment inline. > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Wood [mailto:oss@xxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Friday, September 09, 2016 11:47 AM > To: Y.B. Lu; linux-mmc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx; Arnd > Bergmann > Cc: linuxppc-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-arm- > kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux- > clk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-i2c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; iommu@lists.linux- > foundation.org; netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Mark Rutland; Rob Herring; > Russell King; Jochen Friedrich; Joerg Roedel; Claudiu Manoil; Bhupesh > Sharma; Qiang Zhao; Kumar Gala; Santosh Shilimkar; Leo Li; X.B. Xie > Subject: Re: [v11, 5/8] soc: fsl: add GUTS driver for QorIQ platforms > > On Tue, 2016-09-06 at 16:28 +0800, Yangbo Lu wrote: > > The global utilities block controls power management, I/O device > > enabling, power-onreset(POR) configuration monitoring, alternate > > function selection for multiplexed signals,and clock control. > > > > This patch adds a driver to manage and access global utilities block. > > Initially only reading SVR and registering soc device are supported. > > Other guts accesses, such as reading RCW, should eventually be moved > > into this driver as well. > > > > Signed-off-by: Yangbo Lu <yangbo.lu@xxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <oss@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Don't put my signoff on patches that I didn't put it on > myself. Definitely don't put mine *after* yours on patches that were > last modified by you. > > If you want to mention that the soc_id encoding was my suggestion, then > do so explicitly. > [Lu Yangbo-B47093] I found your 'signoff' on this patch at below link. http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/649211/ So, let me just change the order in next version ? Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <oss@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Yangbo Lu <yangbo.lu@xxxxxxx> > > +/* SoC attribute definition for QorIQ platform */ static const struct > > +soc_device_attribute qoriq_soc[] = { #ifdef CONFIG_PPC > > + /* > > + * Power Architecture-based SoCs T Series > > + */ > > + > > + /* SoC: T1024/T1014/T1023/T1013 Rev: 1.0 */ > > + { .soc_id = "svr:0x85400010,name:T1024,die:T1024", > > + .revision = "1.0", > > + }, > > + { .soc_id = "svr:0x85480010,name:T1024E,die:T1024", > > + .revision = "1.0", > > + }, > > Revision could be computed from the low 8 bits of SVR (just as you do for > unknown SVRs). > [Lu Yangbo-B47093] Yes, you're right. Will remove it here. > We could move the die name into .family: > > { > .soc_id = "svr:0x85490010,name:T1023E,", > .family = "QorIQ T1024", > } > > I see you dropped svre (and the trailing comma), though I guess the vast > majority of potential users will be looking at .family. In which case do > we even need name? If we just make the soc_id be "svr:0xnnnnnnnn" then > we could shrink the table to an svr+mask that identifies each die. I'd > still want to keep the "svr:" even if we're giving up on the general > tagging system, to make it clear what the number refers to, and to > provide some defense against users who match only against soc_id rather > than soc_id+family. Or we could go further and format soc_id as "QorIQ > SVR 0xnnnnnnnn" so that soc_id-only matches are fully acceptable rather > than just less dangerous. [Lu Yangbo-B47093] It's a good idea to move die into .family I think. In my opinion, it's better to keep svr and name in soc_id just like your suggestion above. > { > .soc_id = "svr:0x85490010,name:T1023E,", > .family = "QorIQ T1024", > } The user probably don’t like to learn the svr value. What they want is just to match the soc they use. It's convenient to use name+rev for them to match a soc. Regarding shrinking the table, I think it's hard to use svr+mask. Because I find many platforms use different masks. We couldn’t know the mask according svr value. > > > +static const struct soc_device_attribute *fsl_soc_device_match( > > + unsigned int svr, const struct soc_device_attribute *matches) { > > + char svr_match[50]; > > + int n; > > + > > + n = sprintf(svr_match, "*%08x*", svr); > > n = sprintf(svr_match, "svr:0x%08x,*", svr); > > (according to the current encoding) > [Lu Yangbo-B47093] Ok. Will do that. > > + > > + do { > > + if (!matches->soc_id) > > + return NULL; > > + if (glob_match(svr_match, matches->soc_id)) > > + break; > > + } while (matches++); > > Are you expecting "matches++" to ever evaluate as false? [Lu Yangbo-B47093] Yes, this is used to match the soc we use in qoriq_soc array until getting true. We need to get the name and die information defined in array. > > > + /* Register soc device */ > > + soc_dev_attr = kzalloc(sizeof(*soc_dev_attr), GFP_KERNEL); > > + if (!soc_dev_attr) { > > + ret = -ENOMEM; > > + goto out_unmap; > > + } > > Couldn't this be statically allocated? [Lu Yangbo-B47093] Do you mean we define this struct statically ? static struct soc_device_attribute soc_dev_attr; > > > + > > + machine = of_flat_dt_get_machine_name(); > > + if (machine) > > + soc_dev_attr->machine = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "%s", > > machine); > > + > > + soc_dev_attr->family = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "QorIQ"); > > + > > + svr = fsl_guts_get_svr(); > > + fsl_soc = fsl_soc_device_match(svr, qoriq_soc); > > + if (fsl_soc) { > > + soc_dev_attr->soc_id = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "%s", > > + fsl_soc->soc_id); > > You can use kstrdup() if you're just copying the string as is. [Lu Yangbo-B47093] Ok. Will do that. > > > + soc_dev_attr->revision = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "%s", > > + fsl_soc->revision); > > + } else { > > + soc_dev_attr->soc_id = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "0x%08x", > > svr); > > kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "svr:0x%08x,", svr); [Lu Yangbo-B47093] Sorry, will add that. > > > > + > > + soc_dev = soc_device_register(soc_dev_attr); > > + if (IS_ERR(soc_dev)) { > > + ret = -ENODEV; > > Why are you changing the error code? [Lu Yangbo-B47093] What error code should we use ? :) > > > + goto out; > > + } else { > > Unnecessary "else". [Lu Yangbo-B47093] Oh.. Correct! > > > + pr_info("Detected: %s\n", soc_dev_attr->machine); > > Machine: %s [Lu Yangbo-B47093] Ok. Will do that. > > > + pr_info("Detected SoC family: %s\n", soc_dev_attr->family); > > + pr_info("Detected SoC ID: %s, revision: %s\n", > > + soc_dev_attr->soc_id, soc_dev_attr->revision); > > s/Detected //g [Lu Yangbo-B47093] Ok, will do that. > > > > + } > > + return 0; > > +out: > > + kfree(soc_dev_attr->machine); > > + kfree(soc_dev_attr->family); > > + kfree(soc_dev_attr->soc_id); > > + kfree(soc_dev_attr->revision); > > + kfree(soc_dev_attr); > > +out_unmap: > > + iounmap(guts->regs); > > +out_free: > > + kfree(guts); > > devm [Lu Yangbo-B47093] What's the devm meaning here :) > > > +static int fsl_guts_remove(struct platform_device *dev) { > > + kfree(soc_dev_attr->machine); > > + kfree(soc_dev_attr->family); > > + kfree(soc_dev_attr->soc_id); > > + kfree(soc_dev_attr->revision); > > + kfree(soc_dev_attr); > > + soc_device_unregister(soc_dev); > > + iounmap(guts->regs); > > + kfree(guts); > > + return 0; > > +} > > Don't free the memory before you unregister the device that uses it (moot > if you use devm). [Lu Yangbo-B47093] The soc.c driver mentions that. Ensure soc_dev->attr is freed prior to calling soc_device_unregister. > > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_FSL_GUTS > > +unsigned int fsl_guts_get_svr(void); > > +#endif > > Don't ifdef prototypes (unless you're going to provide a stub > alternative). [Lu Yangbo-B47093] Ok, will remove ifdef. > > -Scott ��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{��-��)�� jg��� �����ݢj����G���� ���j:+v���w�m������w�������h�����٥
