Anson Huang
Best Regards!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrey Smirnov <andrew.smir...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2018 6:51 AM
> To: Anson Huang <anson.hu...@nxp.com>
> Cc: Shawn Guo <shawn...@kernel.org>; Sascha Hauer
> <s.ha...@pengutronix.de>; Sascha Hauer <ker...@pengutronix.de>; Fabio
> Estevam <fabio.este...@nxp.com>; linux-arm-kernel
> <linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org>; linux-kernel
> <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; dl-linux-imx <linux-...@nxp.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] soc: imx: gpcv2: make pgc driver more generic for
> other i.MX platforms
>
> On Sun, Aug 5, 2018 at 11:45 PM Anson Huang <anson.hu...@nxp.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > i.MX8MQ and i.MX8MM share same gpc module with i.MX7D, they can reuse
> > gpcv2 pgc driver for power domain control, this patch renames all
> > functions and structure definitions started with "imx7" to "imx", and
> > check machine type to pass platform specific power domain data for
> > power domain driver, thus make
> > gpcv2 pgc driver more generic for i.MX platforms.
> >
>
> Just for the sake of
>
>
> > Signed-off-by: Anson Huang <anson.hu...@nxp.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/soc/imx/gpcv2.c | 68
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
> > 1 file changed, 40 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/soc/imx/gpcv2.c b/drivers/soc/imx/gpcv2.c index
> > 0e31465..0e33cb5 100644
> > --- a/drivers/soc/imx/gpcv2.c
> > +++ b/drivers/soc/imx/gpcv2.c
> > @@ -53,7 +53,7 @@
> >
> > #define GPC_PGC_CTRL_PCR BIT(0)
> >
> > -struct imx7_pgc_domain {
> > +struct imx_pgc_domain {
> > struct generic_pm_domain genpd;
> > struct regmap *regmap;
> > struct regulator *regulator;
> > @@ -69,11 +69,11 @@ struct imx7_pgc_domain {
> > struct device *dev;
> > };
> >
> > -static int imx7_gpc_pu_pgc_sw_pxx_req(struct generic_pm_domain
> > *genpd,
> > +static int imx_gpc_pu_pgc_sw_pxx_req(struct generic_pm_domain *genpd,
> > bool on) {
> > - struct imx7_pgc_domain *domain = container_of(genpd,
> > - struct
> imx7_pgc_domain,
> > + struct imx_pgc_domain *domain = container_of(genpd,
> > + struct
> > + imx_pgc_domain,
> > genpd);
> > unsigned int offset = on ?
> > GPC_PU_PGC_SW_PUP_REQ :
> GPC_PU_PGC_SW_PDN_REQ; @@
> > -150,17 +150,17 @@ static int imx7_gpc_pu_pgc_sw_pxx_req(struct
> generic_pm_domain *genpd,
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > -static int imx7_gpc_pu_pgc_sw_pup_req(struct generic_pm_domain
> > *genpd)
> > +static int imx_gpc_pu_pgc_sw_pup_req(struct generic_pm_domain *genpd)
> > {
> > - return imx7_gpc_pu_pgc_sw_pxx_req(genpd, true);
> > + return imx_gpc_pu_pgc_sw_pxx_req(genpd, true);
> > }
> >
> > -static int imx7_gpc_pu_pgc_sw_pdn_req(struct generic_pm_domain
> > *genpd)
> > +static int imx_gpc_pu_pgc_sw_pdn_req(struct generic_pm_domain *genpd)
> > {
> > - return imx7_gpc_pu_pgc_sw_pxx_req(genpd, false);
> > + return imx_gpc_pu_pgc_sw_pxx_req(genpd, false);
> > }
> >
> > -static const struct imx7_pgc_domain imx7_pgc_domains[] = {
> > +static const struct imx_pgc_domain imx7_pgc_domains[] = {
> > [IMX7_POWER_DOMAIN_MIPI_PHY] = {
> > .genpd = {
> > .name = "mipi-phy",
> > @@ -198,9 +198,9 @@ static const struct imx7_pgc_domain
> imx7_pgc_domains[] = {
> > },
> > };
> >
> > -static int imx7_pgc_domain_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > +static int imx_pgc_domain_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > {
> > - struct imx7_pgc_domain *domain = pdev->dev.platform_data;
> > + struct imx_pgc_domain *domain = pdev->dev.platform_data;
> > int ret;
> >
> > domain->dev = &pdev->dev;
> > @@ -233,9 +233,9 @@ static int imx7_pgc_domain_probe(struct
> platform_device *pdev)
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > -static int imx7_pgc_domain_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > +static int imx_pgc_domain_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > {
> > - struct imx7_pgc_domain *domain = pdev->dev.platform_data;
> > + struct imx_pgc_domain *domain = pdev->dev.platform_data;
> >
> > of_genpd_del_provider(domain->dev->of_node);
> > pm_genpd_remove(&domain->genpd); @@ -243,23 +243,24 @@
> static
> > int imx7_pgc_domain_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > -static const struct platform_device_id imx7_pgc_domain_id[] = {
> > - { "imx7-pgc-domain", },
> > +static const struct platform_device_id imx_pgc_domain_id[] = {
> > + { "imx-pgc-domain", },
> > { },
> > };
> >
> > -static struct platform_driver imx7_pgc_domain_driver = {
> > +static struct platform_driver imx_pgc_domain_driver = {
> > .driver = {
> > - .name = "imx7-pgc",
> > + .name = "imx-pgc",
> > },
> > - .probe = imx7_pgc_domain_probe,
> > - .remove = imx7_pgc_domain_remove,
> > - .id_table = imx7_pgc_domain_id,
> > + .probe = imx_pgc_domain_probe,
> > + .remove = imx_pgc_domain_remove,
> > + .id_table = imx_pgc_domain_id,
> > };
> > -builtin_platform_driver(imx7_pgc_domain_driver)
> > +builtin_platform_driver(imx_pgc_domain_driver)
> >
> > static int imx_gpcv2_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) {
> > + static const struct imx_pgc_domain *imx_pgc_domains;
> > static const struct regmap_range yes_ranges[] = {
> > regmap_reg_range(GPC_LPCR_A_CORE_BSC,
> > GPC_M4_PU_PDN_FLG), @@
> -287,6 +288,7
> > @@ static int imx_gpcv2_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > struct regmap *regmap;
> > struct resource *res;
> > void __iomem *base;
> > + int pgc_max_index;
> > int ret;
> >
> > pgc_np = of_get_child_by_name(dev->of_node, "pgc"); @@ -307,9
> > +309,19 @@ static int imx_gpcv2_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > + if (of_machine_is_compatible("fsl,imx7d")) {
> > + pgc_max_index = ARRAY_SIZE(imx7_pgc_domains);
> > + imx_pgc_domains = imx7_pgc_domains;
> > + }
>
> Is there any reason to do this explicit call to
> of_machine_is_compatible() as opposed to passing necessary data via .data in
> imx_gpcv2_dt_ids[]? The latter seems like a more straightforward way of
> passing variant specific driver info
The reason of NOT using .data is that currently gpcv2 driver uses a structure
array
of imx7_pgc_domains[] which has no fixed length, the .data can ONLY pass the
pointer
of the starting address of imx7_pgc_domains[], and we need to know the array
size of
imx7_pgc_domains, how can we know it if we ONLY got the starting address of
this array
passed from .data. Please advise, thanks.
Anson.
>
> > +
> > + if (!imx_pgc_domains) {
> > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "no device match found\n");
> > + return -ENODEV;
> > + }
>
> And doing so would also allow you to drop the check above.
>
> Other that this seems like a reasonable change:
>
> Acked-by: Andrey Smirnov <andrew.smir...@gmail.com>
>
> Thanks,
> Andrey Smirnov
