[PATCH 03/11] gpio: davinci: Modify to platform driver
Philip, Avinash
avinashphilip at ti.com
Tue Jun 11 08:55:22 EDT 2013
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 17:26:06, Nori, Sekhar wrote:
>
>
> On 5/22/2013 12:40 PM, Philip Avinash wrote:
> > From: KV Sujith <sujithkv at ti.com>
> >
> > Modify GPIO Davinci driver to be compliant to standard platform drivers.
> > The driver did not have platform driver structure or a probe. Instead,
> > had a davinci_gpio_setup() function which is called in the pure_init
> > sequence. The function also had dependency on davinci_soc_info structure
> > of the corresponding platform. For Device Tree(DT) implementation, we
> > need to get rid of the dependency on the davinci_soc_info structure.
> > Hence as a first stage of DT conversion, we implement a probe. Future
> > commits shall modify the probe to read platform related data from DT.
> >
> > - Add platform_driver structure and driver register function for davinci
> > GPIO driver. The driver registration is made to happen in
> > postcore_initcall. This is required since machine init functions like
> > da850_lcd_hw_init() make use of GPIO.
> > - Convert the davinci_gpio_setup() to davinci_gpio_probe().
> > - Remove access of members in soc_info structure. Instead, relevant data
> > are taken from davinci_gpio_platform_data structure pointed by
> > pdev->dev.platform_data.
> > - Change clk_get() to devm_clk_get() as devm_clk_get() is a device
> > managed function and makes error handling simpler.
> > - Change pr_err to dev_err for ngpio error reporting.
> > - Arrange include files and variables in alphabetical order
> >
> > Signed-off-by: KV Sujith <sujithkv at ti.com>
> > [avinashphilip at ti.com: Move global definition for "struct
> > davinci_gpio_controller" variable to local in probe and set it as driver
> > data.]
> > Signed-off-by: Philip Avinash <avinashphilip at ti.com>
> > ---
> > +#include <linux/module.h>
> > +#include <linux/platform_device.h>
> > +#include <linux/platform_data/gpio-davinci.h>
>
> > +#include <mach/gpio-davinci.h>
>
> This include seems unnecessary.
This include is not required.
>
> >
> > #include <asm/mach/irq.h>
>
> While at it, you can get rid of this include and use <linux/irq.h> instead?
Ok
>
> >
> > + pdata = dev->platform_data;
> > + if (!pdata) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "GPIO: No Platform Data Supplied\n");
>
> dev_err should already tell that the error is coming from davinci-gpio
> so no need to prefix GPIO: again.
Ok
>
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + }
> > - if (WARN_ON(!gpio_base))
> > + ctlrs = devm_kzalloc(dev,
> > + ngpio * sizeof(struct davinci_gpio_controller), GFP_KERNEL);
>
> Line break alignment needs fixing.
Ok
>
> > + if (!ctlrs) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "Memory alloc failed\n");
> > return -ENOMEM;
> > + }
> > +
> > + res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
> > + if (unlikely(!res)) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "Invalid mem resource\n");
> > + return -ENODEV;
>
> -EBUSY is better if you cannot get the resource.
Ok
>
> > + }
> > +
> > + gpio_base = devm_ioremap_resource(dev, res);
> > + if (!gpio_base)
> > + return -EADDRNOTAVAIL;
>
> devm_ioremap_resource gives an error encoder pointer if it fails so
> please use that instead of masking it.
Ok
>
> >
> > for (i = 0, base = 0; base < ngpio; i++, base += 32) {
> > ctlrs[i].chip.label = "DaVinci";
> > @@ -179,13 +204,10 @@ static int __init davinci_gpio_setup(void)
> > gpiochip_add(&ctlrs[i].chip);
> > }
> >
> > - soc_info->gpio_ctlrs = ctlrs;
>
> > - soc_info->gpio_ctlrs_num = DIV_ROUND_UP(ngpio, 32);
>
> You drop setting gpio_ctlrs_num here and don't introduce it anywhere
> else in the patchset so in effect you render the inline gpio get/set API
> useless. Looks like this initialization should be moved to platform code?
With [PATCH 08/11] ARM: davinci: start using gpiolib support gpio get/set API
Has no more dependency on soc_info->gpio_ctlrs_num.
I can merge [PATCH 08/11] ARM: davinci: start using gpiolib support to
[PATCH 03/11] gpio: davinci: Modify to platform driver
>
> > -
> > + pdata = dev->platform_data;
> > + ngpio = pdata->ngpio;
> > + res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_IRQ, 0);
> > + if (unlikely(!res)) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "Invalid IRQ resource\n");
> > + return -ENODEV;
>
> -EBUSY again?
Ok
Thanks
Avinash
>
> Thanks,
> Sekhar
>
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list