[PATCH v3 01/20] sh-pfc: Add DT support
Guennadi Liakhovetski
g.liakhovetski at gmx.de
Thu May 16 00:03:10 EST 2013
Hi Laurent
Thanks for your work on this! Sorry for jumping in so late in the game.
Let's do it this way: I don't think my comments are serious enough to
enforce a v4. If noone else complains, I'm fine with addressing them in an
incremental patch. If you get more comments and have to do a v4, you can
address mine too, otherwise I'm fine with this version going in and
improving it slightly afterwards.
On Wed, 15 May 2013, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Support device instantiation through the device tree. The compatible
> property is used to select the SoC pinmux information.
>
> Set the gpio_chip device field to the PFC device to enable automatic
> GPIO OF support.
>
> Cc: devicetree-discuss at lists.ozlabs.org
> Signed-off-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart+renesas at ideasonboard.com>
> ---
> .../bindings/pinctrl/renesas,pfc-pinctrl.txt | 143 ++++++++++++
> drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/core.c | 66 +++++-
> drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pinctrl.c | 244 +++++++++++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 451 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/renesas,pfc-pinctrl.txt
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/renesas,pfc-pinctrl.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/renesas,pfc-pinctrl.txt
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..e7aae39
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/renesas,pfc-pinctrl.txt
> @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@
> +* Renesas Pin Function Controller (GPIO and Pin Mux/Config)
> +
> +The Pin Function Controller (PFC) is a Pin Mux/Config controller. On SH7372,
> +SH73A0, R8A73A4 and R8A7740 it also acts as a GPIO controller.
> +
> +
> +Pin Control
> +-----------
> +
> +Required Properties:
> +
> + - compatible: should be one of the following.
> + - "renesas,pfc-r8a73a4": for R8A73A4 (R-Mobile APE6) compatible pin-controller.
> + - "renesas,pfc-r8a7740": for R8A7740 (R-Mobile A1) compatible pin-controller.
> + - "renesas,pfc-r8a7778": for R8A7778 (R-Mobile M1) compatible pin-controller.
> + - "renesas,pfc-r8a7779": for R8A7779 (R-Car H1) compatible pin-controller.
> + - "renesas,pfc-r8a7790": for R8A7790 (R-Car H2) compatible pin-controller.
> + - "renesas,pfc-sh7372": for SH7372 (SH-Mobile AP4) compatible pin-controller.
> + - "renesas,pfc-sh73a0": for SH73A0 (SH-Mobile AG5) compatible pin-controller.
> +
> + - reg: Base address and length of each memory resource used by the pin
> + controller hardware module.
> +
> +The PFC node also acts as a container for pin configuration nodes. Please refer
> +to pinctrl-bindings.txt in this directory for the definition of the term "pin
> +configuration node" and for the common pinctrl bindings used by client devices.
> +
> +Each pin configuration node represents a desired configuration for a pin, a
> +pin group, or a list of pins or pin groups. The configuration can include the
> +function to select on those pin(s) and pin configuration parameters (such as
> +pull-up and pull-down).
> +
> +Pin configuration nodes contain pin configuration properties, either directly
> +or grouped in child subnodes. Both pin muxing and configuration parameters can
> +be grouped in that way and referenced as a single pin configuration node by
> +client devices.
> +
> +A configuration node or subnode must reference at least one pin (through the
> +pins or pin groups properties) and contain at least a function or one
> +configuration parameter. When the function is present only pin groups can be
> +used to reference pins.
> +
> +All pin configuration nodes and subnodes names are ignored. All of those nodes
> +are parsed through phandles and processed purely based on their content.
> +
> +Pin Configuration Node Properties:
> +
> +- renesas,pins : An array of strings, each string containing the name of a pin.
> +- renesas,groups : An array of strings, each string containing the name of a pin
> + group.
> +
> +- renesas,function: A string containing the name of the function to mux to the
> + pin group(s) specified by the renesas,groups property
> +
> + Valid values for pin, group and function names can be found in the group and
> + function arrays of the PFC data file corresponding to the SoC
> + (drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-*.c)
> +
> +- renesas,pull-up: An integer representing the pull-up strength to be applied
> + to all pins specified by the renesas,pins and renesas-groups properties.
> + 0 disables the pull-up, 1 enables it. Other values should not be used.
> +- renesas,pull-down: An integer representing the pull-down strength to be
> + applied to all pins specified by the renesas,pins and renesas-groups
> + properties. 0 disables the pull-down, 1 enables it. Other values should not
> + be used.
> +
> +
> +GPIO
> +----
> +
> +Required Properties:
> +
> + - gpio-controller: Marks the device node as a gpio controller.
> +
> + - #gpio-cells: Should be 2. The first cell is the pin number and the second
> + cell is used to specify optional parameters as bit flags. Only the GPIO
> + active low flag (bit 0) is currently supported.
> +
> +The syntax of the gpio specifier used by client nodes should be the following
> +with values derived from the SoC user manual.
> +
> + <[phandle of the gpio controller node]
> + [pin number within the gpio controller]
> + [flags and pull up/down]>
How should pull up / down be specified? Above you say only "active low" is
supported so far.
Actually, I'm a bit confused by how pinctrl and GPIO DT nodes should be
implemented:
> +
> +
> +Examples
> +--------
> +
> +Example 1: SH73A0 (SH-Mobile AG5) pin controller node
> +
> + pfc: pfc at e6050000 {
> + compatible = "renesas,pfc-sh73a0";
> + reg = <0xe6050000 0x8000>,
> + <0xe605801c 0x1c>;
> + gpio-controller;
> + #gpio-cells = <2>;
> + };
In this example you add one node, that implements both - a pinctrl and a
GPIO controller. However, on some platforms you add two DT nodes: one for
pinctrl and one for GPIO. While doing that your GPIO node has a compatible
string like
compatible = "renesas,gpio-r8a7778", "renesas,gpio-rcar";
Do I understand it right, that a separate DT node is used for a GPIO
controller if the controllers are really well separated on the hardware,
probably, don't share register address ranges? Is there a driver in the
kernel, that actually probes those compatible strings? Or the driver for
those GPIO controllers isn't DT based? Maybe at least a short explanation
and an example with two DT nodes here, or a reference to another
documentation would help.
[snip]
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/core.c b/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/core.c
> index 3b2fd43..5fa1c6b 100644
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/core.c
> @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
> #include <linux/ioport.h>
> #include <linux/kernel.h>
> #include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/of_device.h>
> #include <linux/pinctrl/machine.h>
> #include <linux/platform_device.h>
> #include <linux/slab.h>
> @@ -348,14 +349,74 @@ int sh_pfc_config_mux(struct sh_pfc *pfc, unsigned mark, int pinmux_type)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_OF
Not sure, is it really a good idea to use this #ifdef here? I think you
could drop all 3 of them in this hunk:
[snip]
> static int sh_pfc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> {
> + const struct platform_device_id *platid = platform_get_device_id(pdev);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_OF
also here
> + struct device_node *np = pdev->dev.of_node;
> +#endif
> const struct sh_pfc_soc_info *info;
> struct sh_pfc *pfc;
> int ret;
>
> - info = pdev->id_entry->driver_data
> - ? (void *)pdev->id_entry->driver_data : pdev->dev.platform_data;
> + if (platid)
> + info = (const void *)platid->driver_data;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_OF
and here.
> + else if (np)
> + info = of_match_device(sh_pfc_of_table, &pdev->dev)->data;
> +#endif
> + else
> + info = pdev->dev.platform_data;
> +
> if (info == NULL)
> return -ENODEV;
>
[snip]
> +static int sh_pfc_dt_node_to_map(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev,
> + struct device_node *np,
> + struct pinctrl_map **map, unsigned *num_maps)
> +{
> + struct sh_pfc_pinctrl *pmx = pinctrl_dev_get_drvdata(pctldev);
> + struct device *dev = pmx->pfc->dev;
> + struct device_node *child;
> + unsigned int index;
> + int ret;
> +
> + *map = NULL;
> + *num_maps = 0;
> + index = 0;
> +
> + for_each_child_of_node(np, child) {
> + ret = sh_pfc_dt_subnode_to_map(dev, child, map, num_maps,
> + &index);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + goto done;
> + }
> +
> + /* If no mapping has been found in child nodes try the config node. */
> + if (*num_maps == 0) {
> + ret = sh_pfc_dt_subnode_to_map(dev, np, map, num_maps, &index);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + goto done;
> + }
> +
> + if (*num_maps == 0) {
> + dev_err(dev, "no mapping found in node %s\n", np->full_name);
> + ret = -EINVAL;
> + goto done;
> + }
> +
> + ret = 0;
> +
> +done:
> + if (ret < 0)
> + sh_pfc_dt_free_map(pctldev, *map, *num_maps);
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
Maybe simpler
+ if (*num_maps)
+ return 0;
+
+ dev_err(dev, "no mapping found in node %s\n", np->full_name);
+ ret = -EINVAL;
+
+done:
+ sh_pfc_dt_free_map(pctldev, *map, *num_maps);
+
+ return ret;
Thanks
Guennadi
---
Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D.
Freelance Open-Source Software Developer
http://www.open-technology.de/
More information about the devicetree-discuss
mailing list