On 18/11/24 13:53, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 18-Nov-24 11:10 AM, Adrian Hunter wrote:
>> On 16/11/24 13:25, Hans de Goede wrote:
>>> Hi Adrian,
>>>
>>> On 15-Nov-24 8:33 AM, Adrian Hunter wrote:
>>>> On 14/11/24 17:56, Hans de Goede wrote:
>>>>> The Vexia Edu Atla 10 tablet distributed to schools in the Spanish
>>>>> Andalucía region has no ACPI fwnode associated with the SDHCI controller
>>>>> for its microsd-slot and thus has no ACPI GPIO resource info.
>>>>>
>>>>> This causes the following error to be logged and the slot to not work:
>>>>> [ 10.572113] sdhci-pci 0000:00:12.0: failed to setup card detect gpio
>>>>>
>>>>> Add a DMI quirk table for providing gpiod_lookup_tables with manually
>>>>> provided CD GPIO info and use this DMI table to provide the CD GPIO info
>>>>> on this tablet. This fixes the microsd-slot not working.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> Changes in v3:
>>>>> - Add a cd_gpio_override pointer to sdhci_pci_fixes
>>>>> - Add sdhci_pci_add_gpio_lookup_table() helper which kmemdup-s a const
>>>>> struct gpiod_lookup_table to avoid races when using async probing
>>>>>
>>>>> Changes in v2:
>>>>> - Make sdhci_pci_dmi_cd_gpio_overrides static const instead of just const
>>>>> - Drop duplicate #include <linux/dmi.h> (already there at the end)
>>>>> ---
>>>>> drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-core.c | 67 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>> drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci.h | 1 +
>>>>> 2 files changed, 68 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-core.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-core.c
>>>>> index ed45ed0bdafd..a2ddbe3d8742 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-core.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-core.c
>>>>> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
>>>>> #include <linux/io.h>
>>>>> #include <linux/iopoll.h>
>>>>> #include <linux/gpio.h>
>>>>> +#include <linux/gpio/machine.h>
>>>>> #include <linux/pm_runtime.h>
>>>>> #include <linux/pm_qos.h>
>>>>> #include <linux/debugfs.h>
>>>>> @@ -1235,6 +1236,29 @@ static const struct sdhci_pci_fixes sdhci_intel_byt_sdio = {
>>>>> .priv_size = sizeof(struct intel_host),
>>>>> };
>>>>>
>>>>> +/* DMI quirks for devices with missing or broken CD GPIO info */
>>>>> +static const struct gpiod_lookup_table vexia_edu_atla10_cd_gpios = {
>>>>> + .dev_id = "0000:00:12.0",
>>>>> + .table = {
>>>>> + GPIO_LOOKUP("INT33FC:00", 38, "cd", GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH),
>>>>> + { }
>>>>> + },
>>>>> +};
>>>>
>>>> This is good but I feel like we should make it more difficult
>>>> to get the size wrong. Could introduce another struct to hold
>>>> the size:
>>>>
>>>> struct sdhci_pci_gpio_data {
>>>> const struct gpiod_lookup_table *gpios;
>>>> size_t size;
>>>> };
>>>>
>>>> static const struct sdhci_pci_gpio_data vexia_edu_atla10_cd_gpio_data = {
>>>> .gpios = &vexia_edu_atla10_cd_gpios,
>>>> .size = sizeof(vexia_edu_atla10_cd_gpios),
>>>> };
>>>>
>>>> So:
>>>> .driver_data = (void *)&vexia_edu_atla10_cd_gpio_data,
>>>> and
>>>> struct sdhci_pci_gpio_data *data;
>>>> ...
>>>> data = dmi_id->driver_data;
>>>>
>>>> cd_gpio_lookup_table = kmemdup(data->gpios, data->size, GFP_KERNEL);
>>>
>>> Interesting idea. But I'm afraid that sizeof(variable-name) on a struct
>>> with a flexible array member returns the same as just sizeof(struct struct-name)
>>> I added the following debug print to verify this:
>>>
>>> static int byt_sd_probe_slot(struct sdhci_pci_slot *slot)
>>> {
>>> + pr_info("sizeof(vexia_edu_atla10_cd_gpios) %lu sizeof(struct gpiod_lookup_table) %lu\n",
>>> + sizeof(vexia_edu_atla10_cd_gpios), sizeof(struct gpiod_lookup_table));
>>> byt_probe_slot(slot);
>>> slot->host->mmc->caps |= MMC_CAP_WAIT_WHILE_BUSY |
>>> MMC_CAP_AGGRESSIVE_PM | MMC_CAP_CD_WAKE;
>>>
>>> And that prints:
>>>
>>> [ 10.459681] sizeof(vexia_edu_atla10_cd_gpios) 24 sizeof(struct gpiod_lookup_table) 24
>>>
>>> So using sizeof(vexia_edu_atla10_cd_gpios) to get the size including the 2
>>> flexible array members does not work since sizeof() does not take into
>>> account the size of the flexible array members.
>>
>> Thanks for spotting that!
>>
>> Perhaps we should check the table size then?
>> e.g.
>> struct gpiod_lookup_table *table;
>> size_t count;
>>
>> ...
>>
>> table = dmi_id->driver_data;
>> for (count = 0; table->table[count].key; count++)
>> ;
>> if (count != 1)
>> return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
>
> That works for me, but why not just use the found count instead of
> returning -EINVAL ?
I was thinking it avoids the count == 0 case, but I guess it
doesn't actually matter.
The kmemdup size would need to use count + 1
>
> Regards,
>
> Hans
>
>
>
>>
>>>>
>>>>> +
>>>>> +static const struct dmi_system_id sdhci_intel_byt_cd_gpio_override[] = {
>>>>> + {
>>>>> + /* Vexia Edu Atla 10 tablet 9V version */
>>>>> + .matches = {
>>>>> + DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_VENDOR, "AMI Corporation"),
>>>>> + DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_NAME, "Aptio CRB"),
>>>>> + /* Above strings are too generic, also match on BIOS date */
>>>>> + DMI_MATCH(DMI_BIOS_DATE, "08/25/2014"),
>>>>> + },
>>>>> + .driver_data = (void *)&vexia_edu_atla10_cd_gpios,
>>>>> + },
>>>>> + { }
>>>>> +};
>>>>> +
>>>>> static const struct sdhci_pci_fixes sdhci_intel_byt_sd = {
>>>>> #ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP
>>>>> .resume = byt_resume,
>>>>> @@ -1253,6 +1277,7 @@ static const struct sdhci_pci_fixes sdhci_intel_byt_sd = {
>>>>> .add_host = byt_add_host,
>>>>> .remove_slot = byt_remove_slot,
>>>>> .ops = &sdhci_intel_byt_ops,
>>>>> + .cd_gpio_override = sdhci_intel_byt_cd_gpio_override,
>>>>> .priv_size = sizeof(struct intel_host),
>>>>> };
>>>>>
>>>>> @@ -2054,6 +2079,37 @@ static const struct dev_pm_ops sdhci_pci_pm_ops = {
>>>>> * *
>>>>> \*****************************************************************************/
>>>>>
>>>>> +static struct gpiod_lookup_table *sdhci_pci_add_gpio_lookup_table(
>>>>> + struct sdhci_pci_chip *chip)
>>>>
>>>> Let's not line wrap until 100 columns
>>>>
>>>>> +{
>>>>> + struct gpiod_lookup_table *cd_gpio_lookup_table;
>>>>> + const struct dmi_system_id *dmi_id = NULL;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if (chip->fixes && chip->fixes->cd_gpio_override)
>>>>> + dmi_id = dmi_first_match(chip->fixes->cd_gpio_override);
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if (!dmi_id)
>>>>> + return NULL;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + cd_gpio_lookup_table = kmemdup(dmi_id->driver_data,
>>>>> + /* 1 GPIO lookup entry + 1 terminating entry */
>>>>> + struct_size(cd_gpio_lookup_table, table, 2),
>>>>> + GFP_KERNEL);
>>>>> + if (!cd_gpio_lookup_table)
>>>>> + return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
>>>>> +
>>>>> + gpiod_add_lookup_table(cd_gpio_lookup_table);
>>>>> + return cd_gpio_lookup_table;
>>>>> +}
>>>>> +
>>>>> +static void sdhci_pci_remove_gpio_lookup_table(struct gpiod_lookup_table *lookup_table)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> + if (lookup_table) {
>>>>> + gpiod_remove_lookup_table(lookup_table);
>>>>> + kfree(lookup_table);
>>>>> + }
>>>>> +}
>>>>> +
>>>>> static struct sdhci_pci_slot *sdhci_pci_probe_slot(
>>>>> struct pci_dev *pdev, struct sdhci_pci_chip *chip, int first_bar,
>>>>> int slotno)
>>>>> @@ -2129,8 +2185,19 @@ static struct sdhci_pci_slot *sdhci_pci_probe_slot(
>>>>> device_init_wakeup(&pdev->dev, true);
>>>>>
>>>>> if (slot->cd_idx >= 0) {
>>>>> + struct gpiod_lookup_table *cd_gpio_lookup_table;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + cd_gpio_lookup_table = sdhci_pci_add_gpio_lookup_table(chip);
>>>>> + if (IS_ERR(cd_gpio_lookup_table)) {
>>>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(cd_gpio_lookup_table);
>>>>> + goto remove;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> +
>>>>> ret = mmc_gpiod_request_cd(host->mmc, "cd", slot->cd_idx,
>>>>> slot->cd_override_level, 0);
>>>>> +
>>>>> + sdhci_pci_remove_gpio_lookup_table(cd_gpio_lookup_table);
>>>>> +
>>>>> if (ret && ret != -EPROBE_DEFER)
>>>>> ret = mmc_gpiod_request_cd(host->mmc, NULL,
>>>>> slot->cd_idx,
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci.h b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci.h
>>>>> index 153704f812ed..4973fa859217 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci.h
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci.h
>>>>> @@ -156,6 +156,7 @@ struct sdhci_pci_fixes {
>>>>> #endif
>>>>>
>>>>> const struct sdhci_ops *ops;
>>>>> + const struct dmi_system_id *cd_gpio_override;
>>>>> size_t priv_size;
>>>>> };
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
