Hi Michael,
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 6:59 PM, Michael Karcher
<kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 17.11.2015 09:16, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
+static int xsurf100_probe(struct zorro_dev *zdev, const struct zorro_device_id *ent)
+{
+ struct platform_device *pdev;
+ struct ax_plat_data ax88796_data;
+ struct resource res[2] = {
+ DEFINE_RES_IRQ(IRQ_AMIGA_PORTS),
+ DEFINE_RES_IO(zdev->resource.start + XS1000_8390_BASE, 4 * 0x20)
+ };
+ int reg;
+ u32 reg_offsets[32];
+
+ for (reg = 0; reg < 0x20; reg++)
+ reg_offsets[reg] = 4;
+
+ ax88796_data.flags = AXFLG_HAS_EEPROM;
+ ax88796_data.wordlength = 2;
+ ax88796_data.dcr_val = 0x48;
+ ax88796_data.rcr_val = 0x40;
+ ax88796_data.reg_offsets = reg_offsets;
+
+ // TODO: xsurf100 specific accelerated data exchange
+
+ pdev = platform_device_register_resndata(
+ &zdev->dev, "ax88796", zdev->slotaddr,
+ res, 2,
+ &ax88796_data, sizeof ax88796_data);
+
+ // TODO: NULL check
+ zorro_set_drvdata(zdev, pdev);
This looks a bit strange to me: storing another platform device in the
driver-specific data. But I guess it's valid ;-)
We get a zorro device from the amiga subsystem for each XSurf 100 board
installed in the machine. I want to bind the platform driver ax88796 to
a subrange of the address space of the XSurf 100. To get the platform
driver bound, I think I need to create a platform device (for each XSurf
100 Zorro device, so I can't have a static platform device allocated in
the Zorro driver). If I dynamically create a platform device, I have to
save the pointer somewhere, so I can remove the platform device when the
module gets unloaded. For me, the obvious place to store the pointer is
the driver-specific data of the Zorro device.
If you have a different suggestion on how to connect the ax88796
platform driver to a Zorro device that looks less strange to you, I am
happy to learn a different way.
Sure, I understand why you're doing it.
BTW, as most Zorro boards are made of one or more "discrete" devices
(e.g. an IDE and Ethernet combo), but only one zorro_driver can bind to it,
I started converting Zorro drivers to MFD drivers a few years ago.
The mfd framework might in fact be the different way I should learn
about. It feels a bit like the approach I used in xsurf100.c is
reinventing the mfd stuff, but I still have to find good documentation
on how to use the mfd framework. I didn't find anything in
linux/Documentation, and the comments in linux/include/linux/mfd/core.h
have a quite steep learning curve.
Yeah, it looks quite complex ;-)
But in the end it's just about calling mfd_add_devices(), which will
create the needed platform_device(s) for you from a list of mfd "cells".
Unfortunately I still haven't finished that.
It would also make it simpler to embed a normal ax88796 platform device.
I don't see yet how your conversion of present Zorro drivers would help
for this new xsurf100 driver. On the other hand, if you just meant to
point out using a mfd driver instead of the "create platform devices by
hand" approach, *like* you are using for other drivers, I got your point
and you are likely right.
Yes, that's what the MFD subsystem is about.
I've pushed my work-in-progress to
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/geert/linux-m68k.git/log/?h=zorro-mfd
Please have a look at the various drivers/zorro/*-mfd.c files for inspiration.
drivers/zorro/8390-cell.c is a dummy cell driver, which is basically a
platform device driver. For X-Surf 100 that would be the existing ax88796
driver.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-m68k" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
