On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 2:16 PM, Bert Vermeulen <bert@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Besides what Mark told you (I mostly about absence of the commit
message) there are few more comments below.
> Signed-off-by: Bert Vermeulen <bert@xxxxxxxx>
> +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-rb4xx.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,419 @@
> +/*
> + * SPI controller driver for the Mikrotik RB4xx boards
> + *
> + * Copyright (C) 2010 Gabor Juhos <juhosg@xxxxxxxxxxx>
2010, 2015 ?
> + *
> + * This file was based on the patches for Linux 2.6.27.39 published by
> + * MikroTik for their RouterBoard 4xx series devices.
> + *
> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as
> + * published by the Free Software Foundation.
> + *
> + */
> +
> +#include <linux/clk.h>
> +#include <linux/err.h>
> +#include <linux/kernel.h>
> +#include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/init.h>
> +#include <linux/delay.h>
> +#include <linux/spinlock.h>
> +#include <linux/workqueue.h>
> +#include <linux/platform_device.h>
> +#include <linux/spi/spi.h>
> +
> +#include <asm/mach-ath79/ar71xx_regs.h>
> +#include <asm/mach-ath79/ath79.h>
> +
> +#define DRV_NAME "rb4xx-spi"
> +#define DRV_DESC "Mikrotik RB4xx SPI controller driver"
> +#define DRV_VERSION "0.1.0"
> +
> +#define SPI_CTRL_FASTEST 0x40
> +#define SPI_HZ 33333334
> +
> +#undef RB4XX_SPI_DEBUG
Why is it here?
> +
> +struct rb4xx_spi {
> + void __iomem *base;
> + struct spi_master *master;
> +
> + unsigned spi_ctrl;
> +
> + struct clk *ahb_clk;
> + unsigned long ahb_freq;
> +
> + spinlock_t lock;
> + struct list_head queue;
> + int busy:1;
> + int cs_wait;
> +};
> +
> +static unsigned spi_clk_low = AR71XX_SPI_IOC_CS1;
> +
> +#ifdef RB4XX_SPI_DEBUG
> +static inline void do_spi_delay(void)
> +{
> + ndelay(20000);
> +}
> +#else
> +static inline void do_spi_delay(void) { }
> +#endif
> +
> +static inline void do_spi_init(struct spi_device *spi)
> +{
> + unsigned cs = AR71XX_SPI_IOC_CS0 | AR71XX_SPI_IOC_CS1;
> +
> + if (!(spi->mode & SPI_CS_HIGH))
> + cs ^= (spi->chip_select == 2) ? AR71XX_SPI_IOC_CS1 :
> + AR71XX_SPI_IOC_CS0;
What is the magic CS == 2?
> +
> + spi_clk_low = cs;
> +}
> +
> +static inline void do_spi_finish(void __iomem *base)
> +{
> + do_spi_delay();
> + __raw_writel(AR71XX_SPI_IOC_CS0 | AR71XX_SPI_IOC_CS1,
> + base + AR71XX_SPI_REG_IOC);
I highly recommend you to provide pair of inliners to access hardware.
It would be easy to maintain…
> +}
> +
> +static inline void do_spi_clk(void __iomem *base, int bit)
> +{
> + unsigned bval = spi_clk_low | ((bit & 1) ? AR71XX_SPI_IOC_DO : 0);
> +
> + do_spi_delay();
> + __raw_writel(bval, base + AR71XX_SPI_REG_IOC);
…and you may easily provide rb4xx_writel_delayed() as well.
> + do_spi_delay();
> + __raw_writel(bval | AR71XX_SPI_IOC_CLK, base + AR71XX_SPI_REG_IOC);
> +}
> +
> +static void do_spi_byte(void __iomem *base, unsigned char byte)
> +{
> + do_spi_clk(base, byte >> 7);
> + do_spi_clk(base, byte >> 6);
> + do_spi_clk(base, byte >> 5);
> + do_spi_clk(base, byte >> 4);
> + do_spi_clk(base, byte >> 3);
> + do_spi_clk(base, byte >> 2);
> + do_spi_clk(base, byte >> 1);
> + do_spi_clk(base, byte);
> +
> + pr_debug("spi_byte sent 0x%02x got 0x%02x\n",
> + (unsigned)byte,
> + (unsigned char)__raw_readl(base + AR71XX_SPI_REG_RDS));
> +}
> +
> +static inline void do_spi_clk_fast(void __iomem *base, unsigned bit1,
> + unsigned bit2)
> +{
> + unsigned bval = (spi_clk_low |
> + ((bit1 & 1) ? AR71XX_SPI_IOC_DO : 0) |
> + ((bit2 & 1) ? AR71XX_SPI_IOC_CS2 : 0));
Regarding to the usage, why not to provide one variable with two bits?
> + do_spi_delay();
> + __raw_writel(bval, base + AR71XX_SPI_REG_IOC);
> + do_spi_delay();
> + __raw_writel(bval | AR71XX_SPI_IOC_CLK, base + AR71XX_SPI_REG_IOC);
> +}
> +
> +static void do_spi_byte_fast(void __iomem *base, unsigned char byte)
> +{
> + do_spi_clk_fast(base, byte >> 7, byte >> 6);
> + do_spi_clk_fast(base, byte >> 5, byte >> 4);
> + do_spi_clk_fast(base, byte >> 3, byte >> 2);
> + do_spi_clk_fast(base, byte >> 1, byte >> 0);
> +
> + pr_debug("spi_byte_fast sent 0x%02x got 0x%02x\n",
> + (unsigned)byte,
> + (unsigned char) __raw_readl(base + AR71XX_SPI_REG_RDS));
> +}
> +
> +static int rb4xx_spi_txrx(void __iomem *base, struct spi_transfer *t)
> +{
> + const unsigned char *rxv_ptr = NULL;
> + const unsigned char *tx_ptr = t->tx_buf;
> + unsigned char *rx_ptr = t->rx_buf;
> + unsigned i;
> +
> + pr_debug("spi_txrx len %u tx %u rx %u\n", t->len,
> + (t->tx_buf ? 1 : 0),
!!t->tx_buf ?
Or personally I prefer to see %p here.
> + (t->rx_buf ? 1 : 0));
Ditto.
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < t->len; ++i) {
> + unsigned char sdata = tx_ptr ? tx_ptr[i] : 0;
> +
> + if (t->fast_write)
> + do_spi_byte_fast(base, sdata);
> + else
> + do_spi_byte(base, sdata);
> +
> + if (rx_ptr) {
> + rx_ptr[i] = __raw_readl(base + AR71XX_SPI_REG_RDS) & 0xff;
> + } else if (rxv_ptr) {
> + unsigned char c = __raw_readl(base + AR71XX_SPI_REG_RDS);
> +
> + if (rxv_ptr[i] != c)
> + return i;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + return i;
> +}
> +
> +static int rb4xx_spi_msg(struct rb4xx_spi *rbspi, struct spi_message *m)
> +{
> + struct spi_transfer *t = NULL;
> + void __iomem *base = rbspi->base;
> +
> + m->status = 0;
> + if (list_empty(&m->transfers))
> + return -1;
> +
> + __raw_writel(AR71XX_SPI_FS_GPIO, base + AR71XX_SPI_REG_FS);
> + __raw_writel(SPI_CTRL_FASTEST, base + AR71XX_SPI_REG_CTRL);
> + do_spi_init(m->spi);
> +
> + list_for_each_entry(t, &m->transfers, transfer_list) {
> + int len;
> +
> + len = rb4xx_spi_txrx(base, t);
> + if (len != t->len) {
> + m->status = -EMSGSIZE;
> + break;
> + }
> + m->actual_length += len;
> +
> + if (t->cs_change) {
> + if (list_is_last(&t->transfer_list, &m->transfers)) {
> + /* wait for continuation */
> + return m->spi->chip_select;
> + }
> + do_spi_finish(base);
> + ndelay(100);
> + }
> + }
> +
> + do_spi_finish(base);
> + __raw_writel(rbspi->spi_ctrl, base + AR71XX_SPI_REG_CTRL);
> + __raw_writel(0, base + AR71XX_SPI_REG_FS);
> + return -1;
> +}
> +
> +static void rb4xx_spi_process_queue_locked(struct rb4xx_spi *rbspi,
> + unsigned long *flags)
> +{
> + int cs = rbspi->cs_wait;
> +
> + rbspi->busy = 1;
> + while (!list_empty(&rbspi->queue)) {
> + struct spi_message *m;
> +
> + list_for_each_entry(m, &rbspi->queue, queue)
> + if (cs < 0 || cs == m->spi->chip_select)
> + break;
> +
> + if (&m->queue == &rbspi->queue)
> + break;
> +
> + list_del_init(&m->queue);
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rbspi->lock, *flags);
> +
> + cs = rb4xx_spi_msg(rbspi, m);
> + m->complete(m->context);
> +
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&rbspi->lock, *flags);
> + }
> +
> + rbspi->cs_wait = cs;
> + rbspi->busy = 0;
> +
> + if (cs >= 0) {
> + /* TODO: add timer to unlock cs after 1s inactivity */
> + }
> +}
> +
> +static int rb4xx_spi_transfer(struct spi_device *spi,
> + struct spi_message *m)
> +{
> + struct rb4xx_spi *rbspi = spi_master_get_devdata(spi->master);
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + m->actual_length = 0;
> + m->status = -EINPROGRESS;
> +
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&rbspi->lock, flags);
> + list_add_tail(&m->queue, &rbspi->queue);
> + if (rbspi->busy ||
> + (rbspi->cs_wait >= 0 && rbspi->cs_wait != m->spi->chip_select)) {
> + /* job will be done later */
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rbspi->lock, flags);
> + return 0;
> + }
> +
> + /* process job in current context */
> + rb4xx_spi_process_queue_locked(rbspi, &flags);
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rbspi->lock, flags);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int rb4xx_spi_setup(struct spi_device *spi)
> +{
> + struct rb4xx_spi *rbspi = spi_master_get_devdata(spi->master);
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + if (spi->mode & ~(SPI_CS_HIGH)) {
> + dev_err(&spi->dev, "mode %x not supported\n",
> + (unsigned) spi->mode);
Why explicitly casted?
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + if (spi->bits_per_word != 8 && spi->bits_per_word != 0) {
> + dev_err(&spi->dev, "bits_per_word %u not supported\n",
> + (unsigned) spi->bits_per_word);
Ditto.
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&rbspi->lock, flags);
> + if (rbspi->cs_wait == spi->chip_select && !rbspi->busy) {
> + rbspi->cs_wait = -1;
> + rb4xx_spi_process_queue_locked(rbspi, &flags);
> + }
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rbspi->lock, flags);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static unsigned get_spi_ctrl(struct rb4xx_spi *rbspi)
> +{
> + unsigned div;
> +
> + div = (rbspi->ahb_freq - 1) / (2 * SPI_HZ);
> +
> + /*
> + * CPU has a bug at (div == 0) - first bit read is random
> + */
Would it be one line?
> + if (div == 0)
> + ++div;
div++ will work as well.
> +
> + return SPI_CTRL_FASTEST + div;
> +}
> +
> +static int rb4xx_spi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> + struct spi_master *master;
> + struct rb4xx_spi *rbspi;
> + struct resource *r;
> + int err = 0;
> +
> + master = spi_alloc_master(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*rbspi));
What if you set clock, get resources first and then allocate master?
> + if (!master) {
> + err = -ENOMEM;
> + goto err_out;
> + }
> +
> + master->bus_num = 0;
> + master->num_chipselect = 3;
> + master->setup = rb4xx_spi_setup;
> + master->transfer = rb4xx_spi_transfer;
> +
> + rbspi = spi_master_get_devdata(master);
> +
> + rbspi->ahb_clk = clk_get(&pdev->dev, "ahb");
What about devm_*, here devm_clk_get()?
> + if (IS_ERR(rbspi->ahb_clk)) {
> + err = PTR_ERR(rbspi->ahb_clk);
> + goto err_put_master;
> + }
> +
> + err = clk_enable(rbspi->ahb_clk);
Shouldn't be clk_prepare_enable()?
> + if (err)
> + goto err_clk_put;
> +
> + rbspi->ahb_freq = clk_get_rate(rbspi->ahb_clk);
> + if (!rbspi->ahb_freq) {
> + err = -EINVAL;
> + goto err_clk_disable;
> + }
> +
> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, rbspi);
> +
> + r = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
> + if (!r) {
> + err = -ENOENT;
> + goto err_clk_disable;
> + }
> +
> + rbspi->base = ioremap(r->start, r->end - r->start + 1);
> + if (!rbspi->base) {
> + err = -ENXIO;
> + goto err_clk_disable;
> + }
devm_ioremap_resource()
> +
> + rbspi->master = master;
> + rbspi->spi_ctrl = get_spi_ctrl(rbspi);
> + rbspi->cs_wait = -1;
> +
> + spin_lock_init(&rbspi->lock);
> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&rbspi->queue);
> +
> + err = spi_register_master(master);
> + if (err) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to register SPI master\n");
> + goto err_iounmap;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +
> +err_iounmap:
> + iounmap(rbspi->base);
Gone with devm_*
> +err_clk_disable:
> + clk_disable(rbspi->ahb_clk);
clk_disable_unprepare
> +err_clk_put:
> + clk_put(rbspi->ahb_clk);
Ditto.
> +err_put_master:
> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, NULL);
Not needed.
> + spi_master_put(master);
> +err_out:
> + return err;
> +}
> +
> +static int rb4xx_spi_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> + struct rb4xx_spi *rbspi = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> +
> + iounmap(rbspi->base);
Will gone with devm_*.
> + clk_disable(rbspi->ahb_clk);
clk_disable_unprepare()
> + clk_put(rbspi->ahb_clk);
Ditto.
> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, NULL);
Not needed.
> + spi_master_put(rbspi->master);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static struct platform_driver rb4xx_spi_drv = {
> + .probe = rb4xx_spi_probe,
> + .remove = rb4xx_spi_remove,
> + .driver = {
> + .name = DRV_NAME,
> + .owner = THIS_MODULE,
Not needed.
> + },
> +};
> +
> +static int __init rb4xx_spi_init(void)
> +{
> + return platform_driver_register(&rb4xx_spi_drv);
> +}
> +subsys_initcall(rb4xx_spi_init);
> +
> +static void __exit rb4xx_spi_exit(void)
> +{
> + platform_driver_unregister(&rb4xx_spi_drv);
> +}
> +
> +module_exit(rb4xx_spi_exit);
> +
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION(DRV_DESC);
> +MODULE_VERSION(DRV_VERSION);
> +MODULE_AUTHOR("Gabor Juhos <juhosg@xxxxxxxxxxx>");
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-spi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH 1/2] spi: Add SPI driver for Mikrotik RB4xx series boards
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] spi: Add SPI driver for Mikrotik RB4xx series boards
- From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 23:40:16 +0200
- In-reply-to: <1426853793-24454-2-git-send-email-bert@biot.com>
- References:
- [PATCH 0/2] spi: Add driver for Routerboard RB4xx boards
- From: Bert Vermeulen
- [PATCH 1/2] spi: Add SPI driver for Mikrotik RB4xx series boards
- From: Bert Vermeulen
- [PATCH 0/2] spi: Add driver for Routerboard RB4xx boards
- Prev by Date: Re: [RESEND PATCH] spi: of: do explicitly request modules for of-registered devices
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 2/2] spi: Add driver for the CPLD chip on Mikrotik RB4xx boards
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 1/2] spi: Add SPI driver for Mikrotik RB4xx series boards
- Next by thread: [PATCH 2/2] spi: Add driver for the CPLD chip on Mikrotik RB4xx boards
- Index(es):
 |