Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] virtio-spi: Add virtio SPI driver.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi @Qiang Zhang,

Thank you for your comments, and please refer to my response below. I would co-work with Harald on this driver.

On 9/9/2024 8:59 PM, Qiang Zhang wrote:
Hi, Harald

On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 12:28:12PM +0100, Harald Mommer wrote:
From: Harald Mommer <harald.mommer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

This is the virtio SPI Linux kernel driver.

Signed-off-by: Harald Mommer <Harald.Mommer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[...]
+static int virtio_spi_probe(struct virtio_device *vdev)
+{
+	struct device_node *np = vdev->dev.parent->of_node;
+	struct virtio_spi_priv *priv;
+	struct spi_controller *ctrl;
+	int err;
+	u32 bus_num;
+	u16 csi;
+
+	ctrl = devm_spi_alloc_host(&vdev->dev, sizeof(*priv));
+	if (!ctrl)
+		return -ENOMEM;
+
+	priv = spi_controller_get_devdata(ctrl);
+	priv->vdev = vdev;
+	vdev->priv = priv;
+	ctrl->dev.of_node = vdev->dev.of_node;

To support ACPI, ACPI node of the controller needs to be set:

	/*
	 * Setup ACPI node for controlled devices which will be probed through
	 * ACPI.
	 */
	ACPI_COMPANION_SET(&vdev->dev, ACPI_COMPANION(vdev->dev.parent));


Yes, will add in next patch.

+	dev_set_drvdata(&vdev->dev, ctrl);
+
+	init_completion(&priv->spi_req.completion);
+
+	err = of_property_read_u32(np, "spi,bus-num", &bus_num);
+	if (!err && bus_num <= S16_MAX)
+		ctrl->bus_num = (s16)bus_num;

This is not the right way to fix bus number. You can use OF alias.
Also, to work with ACPI, we should use common API like
device_property_read_u32.


I agree with you, "spi,bus-num" should not be mandatory in the device tree.

How about updating as follows:

+	err = device_property_read_u32(ctrl->dev, "spi,bus-num", &bus_num);
+	if (!err && bus_num <= S16_MAX)
+		ctrl->bus_num = (s16)bus_num;
+	else
+		ctrl->bus_num = -1;

So if "spi,bus-num" not set, bus_num is initialized as -1, then in function spi_register_controller, bus_num will be reassigned by OF alias(https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/spi/spi.c?h=v6.13-rc4#n3287), or dynamic allocated(https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/spi/spi.c?h=v6.13-rc4#n3295).

+
+	virtio_spi_read_config(vdev);
+
+	ctrl->transfer_one = virtio_spi_transfer_one;
+
+	err = virtio_spi_find_vqs(priv);
+	if (err) {
+		dev_err(&vdev->dev, "Cannot setup virtqueues\n");
+		return err;
+	}
+
+	board_info.max_speed_hz = priv->max_freq_hz;
+	board_info.bus_num = (u16)ctrl->bus_num;
+
+	if (!(priv->mode_func_supported & VIRTIO_SPI_CS_HIGH))
+		board_info.mode = SPI_MODE_0;
+	else
+		board_info.mode = SPI_MODE_0 | SPI_CS_HIGH;
+
+	err = spi_register_controller(ctrl);
+	if (err) {
+		dev_err(&vdev->dev, "Cannot register controller\n");
+		goto err_return;
+	}
+
+	if (vdev->dev.of_node) {
+		dev_dbg(&vdev->dev, "Final setup triggered by DT child node\n");
+		return 0;
+	}
How about ACPI path?
+
+	/* Add chip selects to controller */
+	for (csi = 0; csi < ctrl->num_chipselect; csi++) {
+		dev_dbg(&vdev->dev, "Setting up CS=%u\n", csi);
+		board_info.chip_select = csi;
+
+		if (!spi_new_device(ctrl, &board_info)) {
+			dev_err(&vdev->dev, "Cannot setup device %u\n", csi);
+			spi_unregister_controller(ctrl);
+			err = -ENODEV;
+			goto err_return;
+		}
+	}
Just enumerate SPI devices via DT/ACPI. And a fixed SPI modalias "spi-virtio"
is no better than match method from DT/ACPI.

How about deleting the following code.

+	if (vdev->dev.of_node) {
+		dev_dbg(&vdev->dev, "Final setup triggered by DT child node\n");
+		return 0;
+	}

+	/* Add chip selects to controller */
+	for (csi = 0; csi < ctrl->num_chipselect; csi++) {
+		dev_dbg(&vdev->dev, "Setting up CS=%u\n", csi);
+		board_info.chip_select = csi;
+
+		if (!spi_new_device(ctrl, &board_info)) {
+			dev_err(&vdev->dev, "Cannot setup device %u\n", csi);
+			spi_unregister_controller(ctrl);
+			err = -ENODEV;
+			goto err_return;
+		}
+	}

Then we can use the ACPI implementation in https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/spi/spi.c?h=v6.13-rc4#n3378.

Also creating SPI devices statically based on the board info seems somewhat unreasonable. I agree that DT/ACPI are the only reasonable way to specify the SPI nodes.


Thanks again
Haixu Cui


Thanks,
Qiang





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux ARM (vger)]     [Linux ARM MSM]     [Linux Omap]     [Linux Arm]     [Linux Tegra]     [Fedora ARM]     [Linux for Samsung SOC]     [eCos]     [Linux Fastboot]     [Gcc Help]     [Git]     [DCCP]     [IETF Announce]     [Security]     [Linux MIPS]     [Yosemite Campsites]

  Powered by Linux