On Friday 01 December 2017 04:49 AM, Grygorii Strashko wrote:

On 11/30/2017 03:36 AM, Keerthy wrote:

quoted

On Tuesday 28 November 2017 11:57 PM, Strashko, Grygorii wrote:

quoted

On 11/15/2017 10:23 PM, Keerthy wrote:

quoted

Adapt driver to utilize dmtimer pdata ops instead of pdata-quirks.

Signed-off-by: Keerthy <j-keerthy@ti.com>
---

Changes in v3:

??? * Used of_find_platdata_by_node function to fetch platform
????? data for timer node.

?? drivers/pwm/pwm-omap-dmtimer.c | 39
++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
?? 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-omap-dmtimer.c

b/drivers/pwm/pwm-omap-dmtimer.c
index 5ad42f3..2caf46b 100644

--- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-omap-dmtimer.c
+++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-omap-dmtimer.c

@@ -23,6 +23,7 @@

?? #include <linux/mutex.h>
?? #include <linux/of.h>
?? #include <linux/of_platform.h>
+#include <linux/platform_data/dmtimer-omap.h>
?? #include <linux/platform_data/pwm_omap_dmtimer.h>
?? #include <linux/platform_device.h>
?? #include <linux/pm_runtime.h>

@@ -37,7 +38,7 @@ struct pwm_omap_dmtimer_chip {

?????? struct pwm_chip chip;
?????? struct mutex mutex;
?????? pwm_omap_dmtimer *dm_timer;
-??? struct pwm_omap_dmtimer_pdata *pdata;
+??? struct omap_dm_timer_ops *pdata;
?????? struct platform_device *dm_timer_pdev;
?? };
?? @@ -242,19 +243,33 @@ static int pwm_omap_dmtimer_probe(struct
platform_device *pdev)
?? {
?????? struct device_node *np = pdev->dev.of_node;
?????? struct device_node *timer;
+??? struct platform_device *timer_pdev;
?????? struct pwm_omap_dmtimer_chip *omap;
-??? struct pwm_omap_dmtimer_pdata *pdata;
+??? struct dmtimer_platform_data *timer_pdata;
+??? struct omap_dm_timer_ops *pdata;
?????? pwm_omap_dmtimer *dm_timer;
?????? u32 v;
?????? int status;
?? -??? pdata = dev_get_platdata(&pdev->dev);
-??? if (!pdata) {
-??????? dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Missing dmtimer platform data\n");
+??? timer = of_parse_phandle(np, "ti,timers", 0);
+??? if (!timer)
+??????? return -ENODEV;
+
+??? timer_pdev = of_find_device_by_node(timer);
+??? if (!timer_pdev) {
+??????? dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Unable to find Timer pdev\n");
+??????? return -ENODEV;
+??? }
+
+??? timer_pdata = of_find_platdata_by_node(timer);
+??? if (!timer_pdata) {
+??????? dev_err(&pdev->dev, "dmtimer pdata structure NULL\n");
?????????? return -EINVAL;
?????? }

Huh. I think It might be better if you add smth. like

struct omap_dm_timer *dm_timer = of_omap_dm_timer_get(parent_np,
"ti,timers", idx);

struct omap_dm_timer_ops *pdata = omap_dm_timer_get_ops(dm_timer);

so all DT and platdata implementation details will be hidden.

Grygorii,

This driver is already fetching:

omap->dm_timer_pdev = of_find_device_by_node(timer);

It stores dm_timer_pdev in struct pwm_omap_dmtimer_chip.
So we already need:
timer = of_parse_phandle(np, "ti,timers", 0);
and
omap->dm_timer_pdev = of_find_device_by_node(timer);

So why not just do:

struct omap_dm_timer_ops *pdata =
omap_dm_timer_get_ops(omap->dm_timer_pdev);

if you dont want to do additional optimizations as part of migration
might be
dev_get_platdata(&omap->dm_timer_pdev->dev);

would be enough.

That is pretty much what i want to do with the migration series.

But, again, PWM driver don't need to know so many details about
DM timer implementation and internal structure as consumer.

Totally understand that. I will follow up with more clean ups once the
code is migrated. Hope that is a reasonable approach.