[PATCH 1/4 v5] of_spi: add generic binding support to specify cs gpio
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
plagnioj at jcrosoft.com
Mon Mar 12 13:11:47 EDT 2012
On 09:40 Mon 12 Mar , Grant Likely wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Mar 2012 19:25:37 +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj at jcrosoft.com> wrote:
> > On 08:07 Sun 11 Mar , Grant Likely wrote:
> > > On Fri, 9 Mar 2012 19:25:44 +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj at jcrosoft.com> wrote:
> > > > This will allow to use gpio for chip select with no modification in the
> > > > driver binding
> > > >
> > > > When use the cs-gpios, the gpio number will be passed via the cs_gpio field
> > > > and the number of chip select will automatically increased.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj at jcrosoft.com>
> > > > Cc: devicetree-discuss at lists.ozlabs.org
> > > > Cc: spi-devel-general at lists.sourceforge.net
> > > > ---
> > > > v5:
> > > > update grant comment to simplify the cs_gpio management
> > > >
> > > > Best Regards,
> > > > J.
> > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-bus.txt | 6 ++
> > > > drivers/spi/spi.c | 55 +++++++++++++++++++-
> > > > include/linux/spi/spi.h | 4 ++
> > > > 3 files changed, 62 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-bus.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-bus.txt
> > > > index e782add..c253379 100644
> > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-bus.txt
> > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-bus.txt
> > > > @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ The SPI master node requires the following properties:
> > > > - #size-cells - should be zero.
> > > > - compatible - name of SPI bus controller following generic names
> > > > recommended practice.
> > > > +- cs-gpios - (optional) gpios chip select.
> > > > No other properties are required in the SPI bus node. It is assumed
> > > > that a driver for an SPI bus device will understand that it is an SPI bus.
> > > > However, the binding does not attempt to define the specific method for
> > > > @@ -21,6 +22,8 @@ assumption that board specific platform code will be used to manage
> > > > chip selects. Individual drivers can define additional properties to
> > > > support describing the chip select layout.
> > > >
> > > > +If cs-gpios is used the number of chip select will automatically increased.
> > > > +
> > > > SPI slave nodes must be children of the SPI master node and can
> > > > contain the following properties.
> > > > - reg - (required) chip select address of device.
> > > > @@ -34,6 +37,9 @@ contain the following properties.
> > > > - spi-cs-high - (optional) Empty property indicating device requires
> > > > chip select active high
> > > >
> > > > +If a gpio chipselect is used for the SPI slave the gpio number will be passed
> > > > +via the cs_gpio
> > > > +
> > > > SPI example for an MPC5200 SPI bus:
> > > > spi at f00 {
> > > > #address-cells = <1>;
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi.c b/drivers/spi/spi.c
> > > > index b2ccdea..446eee5 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/spi/spi.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/spi/spi.c
> > > > @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@
> > > > #include <linux/mod_devicetable.h>
> > > > #include <linux/spi/spi.h>
> > > > #include <linux/of_spi.h>
> > > > +#include <linux/of_gpio.h>
> > > > #include <linux/pm_runtime.h>
> > > > #include <linux/export.h>
> > > >
> > > > @@ -322,6 +323,7 @@ struct spi_device *spi_alloc_device(struct spi_master *master)
> > > > spi->dev.parent = &master->dev;
> > > > spi->dev.bus = &spi_bus_type;
> > > > spi->dev.release = spidev_release;
> > > > + spi->cs_gpio = -EINVAL;
> > > > device_initialize(&spi->dev);
> > > > return spi;
> > > > }
> > > > @@ -339,15 +341,16 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(spi_alloc_device);
> > > > int spi_add_device(struct spi_device *spi)
> > > > {
> > > > static DEFINE_MUTEX(spi_add_lock);
> > > > - struct device *dev = spi->master->dev.parent;
> > > > + struct spi_master *master = spi->master;
> > > > + struct device *dev = master->dev.parent;
> > > > struct device *d;
> > > > int status;
> > > >
> > > > /* Chipselects are numbered 0..max; validate. */
> > > > - if (spi->chip_select >= spi->master->num_chipselect) {
> > > > + if (spi->chip_select >= master->num_chipselect) {
> > > > dev_err(dev, "cs%d >= max %d\n",
> > > > spi->chip_select,
> > > > - spi->master->num_chipselect);
> > > > + master->num_chipselect);
> > > > return -EINVAL;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > @@ -371,6 +374,9 @@ int spi_add_device(struct spi_device *spi)
> > > > goto done;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > + if (master->cs_gpios)
> > > > + spi->cs_gpio = master->cs_gpios[spi->chip_select];
> > > > +
> > >
> > > I still don't understand the need for this. Only the master driver will need
> > > this data, and it is already stored in the master->cs_gpios array. Why
> > > does it need to get duplicated into the spi_device?
> > yeah can drop it
> > >
> > > > /* Drivers may modify this initial i/o setup, but will
> > > > * normally rely on the device being setup. Devices
> > > > * using SPI_CS_HIGH can't coexist well otherwise...
> > > > @@ -561,6 +567,45 @@ struct spi_master *spi_alloc_master(struct device *dev, unsigned size)
> > > > }
> > > > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(spi_alloc_master);
> > > >
> > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_OF
> > > > +static int of_spi_register_master(struct spi_master *master)
> > > > +{
> > > > + int nb, i;
> > > > + int *cs;
> > > > + struct device_node *np = master->dev.of_node;
> > > > +
> > > > + if (!np)
> > > > + return 0;
> > > > +
> > > > + nb = of_gpio_named_count(np, "cs-gpios");
> > > > +
> > > > + if (nb < 1)
> > > > + return 0;
> > > > +
> > > > + cs = devm_kzalloc(&master->dev,
> > > > + sizeof(int) * (master->num_chipselect + nb),
> > > > + GFP_KERNEL);
> > >
> > > sizeof(*cs)
> > >
> > > > + master->cs_gpios = cs;
> > > > +
> > > > + if (!master->cs_gpios)
> > > > + return -ENOMEM;
> > > > +
> > > > + memset(cs, -EINVAL, master->num_chipselect);
> > > > + master->num_chipselect += nb;
> > >
> > > Looks buggy. Should be:
> > > if (nb > master->num_chipselect)
> > > master->num_chipselect = nb;
> > >
> > > However, this is actually quite risky. Changing the size of
> > > num_chipselect without the driver knowing about it will most likely
> > > cause breakage in drivers. Drivers may use it as an array index, and
> > > if it gets increased then there will be problems. In fact, drivers
> > > are probably using spi->chip_select as an array or register index so I
> > > don't think it can be transparently extended to include gpios.
> > >
> > > So, this function must change. It cannot be called automatically
> > > from spi_register_master(). It needs to be a library function that spi bus
> > > drivers must call explicitly so they are prepared for a change in the
> > > num_chipselect value.
> > I'll prefer to let the spi framework manage it
>
> I understand your preference, but it must not carry the risk of breakage.
so can we do this in two step add the new generic gpio management and them
make it manage by the spi framework when everyone switch to it
>
> spi devices cannot be added if the cs number is larger than num_chipselect;
> even if those devices are backed by gpios. The controller driver still
> needs to understand they are there and modify it's own num_chipselects
> value. Otherwise transfer requests will pass a CS number larger than
> the bus drivers know what to do with.
>
> > > Also, if we're doing this, then the gpio cs manipulation hook should be
> > > moved out of spi_bitbang and into the core spi_master. There should
> > > also be a stock function for manipulating gpio chip selects. I don't want
> > > spi driver authors under the impression that they should open code the
> > > chip select manipulation.
> > yeah I was thinking about it too
> >
> > how about we split it in two
> >
> > num_hw_cs manage by the drivers
> >
> > and
> >
> > num_gpio_cs for cs gpio
> >
> > and num_chipselect (hw + cs) will for internal use
> >
> > the gpio cs will be after the hw cs.
>
> As already discussed, don't split the number space. Keep gpio cs numbers
> based at zero and let them overlap the hw cs numbers.
I did not want it, and agreed with the overlap
I just want to let drivers just manage the hw cs, the gpio one are manage by
the spi framework
Best Regards,
J.
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list