Hi Vladimir,
thanks for your patch! Some review comments:
On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 11:12 PM Vladimir Zapolskiy <vz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir_zapolskiy@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> The change adds an MFD cell driver for managing pin functions on
> TI DS90Ux9xx de-/serializers.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir_zapolskiy@xxxxxxxxxx>
Please mention in the commit that you are also adding a GPIO
chip driver.
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
I prefer the simple "GPL-2.0+" here.
> +#include <linux/of_gpio.h>
You should not need this include. If you do, something is wrong.
> +#define SER_REG_PIN_CTRL 0x12
> +#define PIN_CTRL_RGB18 BIT(2)
> +#define PIN_CTRL_I2S_DATA_ISLAND BIT(1)
> +#define PIN_CTRL_I2S_CHANNEL_B (BIT(0) | BIT(3))
> +
> +#define SER_REG_I2S_SURROUND 0x1A
> +#define PIN_CTRL_I2S_SURR_BIT BIT(0)
> +
> +#define DES_REG_INDIRECT_PASS 0x16
> +
> +#define OUTPUT_HIGH BIT(3)
> +#define REMOTE_CONTROL BIT(2)
> +#define DIR_INPUT BIT(1)
> +#define ENABLE_GPIO BIT(0)
> +
> +#define GPIO_AS_INPUT (ENABLE_GPIO | DIR_INPUT)
> +#define GPIO_AS_OUTPUT ENABLE_GPIO
> +#define GPIO_OUTPUT_HIGH (GPIO_AS_OUTPUT | OUTPUT_HIGH)
> +#define GPIO_OUTPUT_LOW GPIO_AS_OUTPUT
> +#define GPIO_OUTPUT_REMOTE (GPIO_AS_OUTPUT | REMOTE_CONTROL)
These have a creepily generic look, like they hit the global GPIO
namespace without really clashing. It gets confusing when reading
the code.
Do you think you could prefix them with DS90_* or something
so it is clear that these defines belong in this driver?
> +static const struct gpio_chip ds90ux9xx_gpio_chip = {
> + .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> + .get = ds90ux9xx_gpio_get,
> + .set = ds90ux9xx_gpio_set,
> + .get_direction = ds90ux9xx_gpio_get_direction,
> + .direction_input = ds90ux9xx_gpio_direction_input,
> + .direction_output = ds90ux9xx_gpio_direction_output,
> + .base = -1,
> + .can_sleep = 1,
This is bool so set it = true;
Overall it's a very nice driver. It is pretty complex but pin control
is complex so that's a fact of life.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
