Thread (13 messages) 13 messages, 4 authors, 2016-11-23

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] i2c: designware: Refactoring of the i2c-designware core and platform module

From: Andy Shevchenko <hidden>
Date: 2016-11-18 12:26:41
Also in: linux-i2c, lkml

On Fri, 2016-11-18 at 11:19 +0000, Luis Oliveira wrote:
- Factor out _master() parts of code to separate functions.
- Standardize all code relatated to I2C master.

Signed-off-by: Luis Oliveira <lolivei-HKixBCOQz3hWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
Can you shrink Cc list to people who indeed are involved / concerned?
---
Changes V2->V3: (Andy Shevchenko)
- indentation and style fix
- nothing else was changed in this patch from v2 
Hmm...

May I add few more comments?
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -87,13 +87,13 @@
 #define DW_IC_INTR_GEN_CALL	0x800
 
 #define DW_IC_INTR_DEFAULT_MASK		(DW_IC_INTR_RX_FULL |
\
-					 DW_IC_INTR_TX_EMPTY | \
 					 DW_IC_INTR_TX_ABRT | \
 					 DW_IC_INTR_STOP_DET)
-
Do you need to remove it?

I would leave it...
+#define DW_IC_INTR_MASTER_MASK		(DW_IC_INTR_DEFAULT_MAS
K | \
+					 DW_IC_INTR_TX_EMPTY)
...here.
 #define DW_IC_STATUS_ACTIVITY		0x1
 #define DW_IC_STATUS_TFE		BIT(2)
-#define DW_IC_STATUS_MST_ACTIVITY	BIT(5)
+#define DW_IC_STATUS_MASTER_ACTIVITY	BIT(5)
 
+static void i2c_dw_configure_fifo_master(struct dw_i2c_dev *dev)
+{
+	/* Configure Tx/Rx FIFO threshold levels */
+	dw_writel(dev, dev->tx_fifo_depth / 2, DW_IC_TX_TL);
+	dw_writel(dev, 0, DW_IC_RX_TL);
+
+	/* configure the i2c master */
+	dw_writel(dev, dev->master_cfg, DW_IC_CON);
+	dw_writel(dev, DW_IC_INTR_MASTER_MASK, DW_IC_INTR_MASK);
So, in the original code there were 3 writes, now 4. Please, put an
explanation into commit message.
+}
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -442,12 +453,9 @@ int i2c_dw_init(struct dw_i2c_dev *dev)
 			"Hardware too old to adjust SDA hold
time.\n");
 	}
 
-	/* Configure Tx/Rx FIFO threshold levels */
-	dw_writel(dev, dev->tx_fifo_depth / 2, DW_IC_TX_TL);
-	dw_writel(dev, 0, DW_IC_RX_TL);
-
-	/* configure the i2c master */
-	dw_writel(dev, dev->master_cfg , DW_IC_CON);
+	if ((dev->master_cfg & DW_IC_CON_MASTER) &&
+		(dev->master_cfg & DW_IC_CON_SLAVE_DISABLE))
Indentation!
+		i2c_dw_configure_fifo_master(dev);
-static irqreturn_t i2c_dw_isr(int this_irq, void *dev_id)
+static bool i2c_dw_irq_handler_master(struct dw_i2c_dev *dev)
Perhaps int?
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
 {
-	struct dw_i2c_dev *dev = dev_id;
-	u32 stat, enabled;
-
-	enabled = dw_readl(dev, DW_IC_ENABLE);
-	stat = dw_readl(dev, DW_IC_RAW_INTR_STAT);
-	dev_dbg(dev->dev, "%s: enabled=%#x stat=%#x\n", __func__,
enabled, stat);
-	if (!enabled || !(stat & ~DW_IC_INTR_ACTIVITY))
-		return IRQ_NONE;
+	u32 stat;
 
 	stat = i2c_dw_read_clear_intrbits(dev);
 
@@ -906,7 +907,26 @@ static irqreturn_t i2c_dw_isr(int this_irq, void
*dev_id)
 		i2c_dw_disable_int(dev);
 		dw_writel(dev, stat, DW_IC_INTR_MASK);
 	}
+	return true;
Ditto.

And basically I don't see how this would be not true? Are you planning
to add something here later in the series? Please, elaborate in the
commit message.
+}
+
+static irqreturn_t i2c_dw_isr(int this_irq, void *dev_id)
+{
+	struct dw_i2c_dev *dev = dev_id;
+	u32 stat, enabled, mode;
+
+	enabled = dw_readl(dev, DW_IC_ENABLE);
+	mode = dw_readl(dev, DW_IC_CON);
+	stat = dw_readl(dev, DW_IC_RAW_INTR_STAT);
+
+	dev_dbg(dev->dev, "%s: enabled=%#x stat=%#x\n", __func__,
enabled, stat);
For sake of easier review, can we keep same lines same and in the same
order?

	struct dw_i2c_dev *dev = dev_id;
	u32 stat, enabled;

	enabled = dw_readl(dev, DW_IC_ENABLE);
	stat = dw_readl(dev, DW_IC_RAW_INTR_STAT);
	dev_dbg(dev->dev, "%s: enabled=%#x stat=%#x\n", __func__,
enabled, stat);
	if (!enabled || !(stat & ~DW_IC_INTR_ACTIVITY))
		return IRQ_NONE;

Btw, I do not see how mode is used? Do you have a warning?
Please, fix.
+	if (!enabled || !(stat & ~DW_IC_INTR_ACTIVITY))
+		return IRQ_NONE;
+static void i2c_dw_configure_master(struct platform_device *pdev)
+{
+	struct dw_i2c_dev *dev = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
+
+	dev->master_cfg = DW_IC_CON_MASTER | DW_IC_CON_SLAVE_DISABLE
|
+			  DW_IC_CON_RESTART_EN;
+
+	dev->functionality |= I2C_FUNC_10BIT_ADDR;
Where this came from?
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+	dev_info(&pdev->dev, "I am registed as a I2C Master!\n");
+
+	switch (dev->clk_freq) {
+	case 100000:
+		dev->master_cfg |= DW_IC_CON_SPEED_STD;
+		break;
+	case 3400000:
+		dev->master_cfg |= DW_IC_CON_SPEED_HIGH;
+		break;
+	default:
+		dev->master_cfg |= DW_IC_CON_SPEED_FAST;
+	}
+}
+
 static int i2c_dw_plat_prepare_clk(struct dw_i2c_dev *i_dev, bool
prepare)
 {
 	if (IS_ERR(i_dev->clk))
@@ -222,19 +244,7 @@ static int dw_i2c_plat_probe(struct
platform_device *pdev)
 		I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_WORD_DATA |
 		I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_I2C_BLOCK;
 
-	dev->master_cfg = DW_IC_CON_MASTER | DW_IC_CON_SLAVE_DISABLE
|
-			  DW_IC_CON_RESTART_EN;
-
-	switch (dev->clk_freq) {
-	case 100000:
-		dev->master_cfg |= DW_IC_CON_SPEED_STD;
-		break;
-	case 3400000:
-		dev->master_cfg |= DW_IC_CON_SPEED_HIGH;
-		break;
-	default:
-		dev->master_cfg |= DW_IC_CON_SPEED_FAST;
-	}
+	i2c_dw_configure_master(pdev);
 
 	dev->clk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, NULL);
 	if (!i2c_dw_plat_prepare_clk(dev, true)) {
-- 
Andy Shevchenko [off-list ref]
Intel Finland Oy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help