On 01/29/2013 09:00 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 11:25:35AM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>> On 01/18/2013 10:09 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 09:03:58PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Good point. New use case for us so suggestions on how to do the association cleanly would be most welcome. Is there anything similar out there? We could add a per iio device sysfs interface to add additional mappings but it is a little uggly...
>>>>
>>>
>>> Best idea I can come up with is to disconnect iio_hwmon from the requirement to
>>> instantiate it explicitly. There might be two sysfs entries - one to
>>> attach it to a specific iio device, and one to attach it to individual channels
>>> of an iio device. Similar like the new_device interface on i2c adapters, and
>>> along the line of
>>>
>>> echo max1139 something > /sys/module/iio_hwmon/something_else
>>
>> We'll have to have something more specific or the common case of more than
>> one instance of an adc will cause trouble. Obviously this doesn't matter
>> doing by adding the map from the IIO side.
>>
>>>
>>> and/or
>>>
>>> echo max1139 something channel > /sys/module/iio_hwmon/something_else
>>>
>>> ie sysfs attributes associated with iio_hwmon, not with the iio device itself.
>>>
>> This will play havock with the way the internal mappings work. Originally
>> we had it mapped from both sides by name (e.g. the map wasn't in any way
>> handled by either driver) but that got an awful lot of flack and really
>> wasn't considered acceptable. The current version of treating it much like
>> regulators etc is much cleaner.
>>
>
> I think I am giving up on testing the code on a non-embedded system;
> I would need/use manual instantiation only for testing, and it seems too
> difficult to implement and not really worth it. I'll focus on getting it
> to work with OF.
>
> The current approach, with iio_hwmon requesting its assigned mappings through
> io_channel_get_all(), does not work well for me for a number of reasons.
>
> First, it is difficult to associate device references in OF with actual device
> names. I don't know if you have tried, but while a reference to &iio_hwmon can
> uniquely identify the device name for an OF entry such as
>
> iio_hwmon: iio_hwmon@0 {
> compatible = "iio-hwmon";
> };
>
> it is difficult to predict how the actual iio_hwmon device name looks like.
> Amongst others, it depends if there are additional attributes such as "reg = <>",
> on the value of "@x" (if specified) and other attributes I have not really tracked
> down yet. In other words, when I tried to create a device named "iio_hwmon.0",
> I managed to get all kinds of device names except for "iio_hwmon.0".
>
> Also, the iio_hwmon driver does not know which consumers are assigned to it.
> If it is instantiated before the ADC driver (which happens all the time for me,
> as iio_hwmon does not have to wait for the i2c bus adapter), its call to
> iio_channel_get_all() returns nothing. Even if it does return some mappings,
> there is no guarantee that the mappings are complete (eg if an instance of
> iio_hwmon is mapped to ADC channels from multiple chips).
>
> Other subsystems solve that problem by having the consumer request the resources
> it needs. The leds-gpio driver is an excellent example: It knows from its OF data
> which gpio pins it needs and requests those. If the pins are not available,
> it gets an -EPROBE_DEFER error from the gpio subsystem, and simply defers
> its probe until the missing pins are available.
>
> The question for me is really if it would be possible to implement the same
> approach for the iio subsystem. I would then specify something like
>
> max1139: max1139@35 {
> compatible = "maxim,max1139";
> reg = <0x35>;
> };
>
> ...
> iio_hwmon {
> compatible = "iio-hwmon";
>
> in0 {
> label = "vin";
> iio-map = { &max1139 0 }; /* adc channel 0 */
> };
> in1 {
> label = "vout";
> iio-map = { &max1139 1 }; /* adc channel 1 */
> };
> ...
> };
>
> which would then map into in0/in1 hwmon attributes (with optional "vin" and
> "vout" labels if specified).
>
> Problem here is that io_channel_get() currently does not use the provider name
> as argument to find the resource. Instead, it uses consumer_dev_name and/or
> consumer_channel. I am not sure how to solve that problem. It would be much more
> helpful if the provider would not be tied to the consumer from provider side,
> but from consumer side, and the mapping would be based on provider device and
> index (or something else such as ADC channel name if that is preferred).
>
> Would this kind of solution be acceptable for the iio maintainers ? Is it
> even possible, given that the provider has to currently provide the mapping
> to its intended consumers using iio_map_array_register() ?
Hi Guenter,
I wrote in another mail a few days ago, how I think dt bindings for IIO could
be implemented. The basic idea was to simply use bindings very similar to what
the clk API uses, since its provider/consumer structure actually matches what
we do in IIO pretty good.
The full mail can be found here:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-iio&m=135902119507483&w=2
- Lars
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
