On 02/08/2015 01:36 PM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
On Fri, 6 Feb 2015 10:36:57 -0800
Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, Feb 06, 2015 at 05:59:07PM +0100, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
This patch provides code for reading PWM FAN configuration data via
device tree. The pwm-fan can work with full speed when configuration
is not provided. However, errors are propagated when wrong DT
bindings are found.
Additionally the struct pwm_fan_ctx has been extended.
Signed-off-by: Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
Changes for v2:
- Rename pwm_fan_max_states to pwm_fan_cooling_levels
- Moving pwm_fan_of_get_cooling_data() call after setting end
enabling PWM FAN
- pwm_fan_of_get_cooling_data() now can fail - preserving old
behaviour
- Remove unnecessary dev_err() call
Changes for v3:
- Patch's headline has been reedited
- pwm_fan_of_get_cooling_data() return code is now being checked.
- of_property_count_elems_of_size() is now used instead
of_find_property()
- More verbose patch description added
---
drivers/hwmon/pwm-fan.c | 54
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed,
53 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/pwm-fan.c b/drivers/hwmon/pwm-fan.c
index 870e100..f3f5843 100644
--- a/drivers/hwmon/pwm-fan.c
+++ b/drivers/hwmon/pwm-fan.c
@@ -30,7 +30,10 @@
struct pwm_fan_ctx {
struct mutex lock;
struct pwm_device *pwm;
- unsigned char pwm_value;
+ unsigned int pwm_value;
+ unsigned int pwm_fan_state;
+ unsigned int pwm_fan_max_state;
+ unsigned int *pwm_fan_cooling_levels;
};
static int __set_pwm(struct pwm_fan_ctx *ctx, unsigned long pwm)
@@ -100,6 +103,50 @@ static struct attribute *pwm_fan_attrs[] = {
ATTRIBUTE_GROUPS(pwm_fan);
+int pwm_fan_of_get_cooling_data(struct device *dev, struct
pwm_fan_ctx *ctx) +{
+ struct device_node *np = dev->of_node;
+ int num, i, ret;
+
+ ret = of_property_count_elems_of_size(np, "cooling-levels",
+ sizeof(u32));
+
+ if (ret == -EINVAL) {
+ dev_err(dev, "Property 'cooling-levels' not
found\n");
+ return 0;
Returning 0 is obviously not an error, otherwise you would not return
0 here. So dev_err is wrong.
pr_info would be more appropriate here.
Also, the message itself is wrong; the
property may well be there but have a wrong size.
As fair as I remember the -EINVAL is set only when the property is not
defined. Such situation is correct and our pwm-fan driver should work
with or without it.
of_property_count_elems_of_size returns -EINVAL if np is NULL or if
there is no peoperty or prop->length % elem_size != 0, and -ENODATA
if there is no value associated with the property.
If -EINVAL is not an error, please no message. Noisy drivers are
just that, noisy.
+ }
+
+ if (ret <= 0) {
+ dev_err(dev, "Wrong data!\n");
+ return ret;
+ }
This will result in the driver failing to load if devicetree is not
configured (of_property_count_elems_of_size will return -ENOSYS).
As you pointed out in the comment to v2:
It is OK if the "cooling-levels" is not defined in DT. However, if it
has broken definition, then we should return error. This is what we do
here.
You don't return an error, you return 0, at least in some circumstances.
This is not acceptable. Also, if the call returns 0 you don't return
an error but display a "Wrong data!" error message. Either it is an
error or it is not, but not both.
This is an error. "cooling-levels" with zero elements is regarded as a
broken property.
It returns -ENOSYS if DT is not configured, which is still unacceptable.
And, again, if ret == 0 is an error, you should return an error code,
not display an error message and return 0.
Guenter
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
