U Uwe Kleine-König #
Message details and related content
On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 07:49:47AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 12:59:42PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:quoted
From: Sascha Hauer <redacted> Several drivers have the same device tree parsing code. Create a common helper function for it. Signed-off-by: Sascha Hauer <redacted> [ukl: implement default <0 0> for rts-delay, unset unspecified flags] Acked-by: Nicolas Ferre <redacted> Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <redacted> --- drivers/tty/serial/Kconfig | 4 ++++ drivers/tty/serial/Makefile | 2 ++ drivers/tty/serial/of.c | 47 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++Why is this a separate file, with a Kconfig option that is always enabled? Why not just add the single function to the serial core?
Probably just a matter of taste. If you prefer I can put it into
drivers/tty/serial/serial_core.c
quoted
+/** + * of_get_rs485_mode() - Implement parsing rs485 properties + * @np: uart node + * @rs485conf: output parameter + * + * This function implements the device tree binding described in + * Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/rs485.txt. + * + * Return: 0 on success, 1 if the node doesn't contain rs485 stuff.1 is not an error code :( Return a proper error please.
Well, it's not an error. These properties are optional and if I return
(say) -ENOENT in this case, a caller looks as follows:
ret = of_get_rs485_mode(...);
if (ret == -ENOENT) {
/*
* hmm, does this mean there are no rs485 properties, or
* is this a different error that I should propagate
* because there is a problem with the device tree?
* I'm optimistic and assume the former.
* As of_get_rs485_mode already did everything
* necessary, there is no need to do anything else.
*/
} else if (ret < 0) {
return ret;
}
With the semantic I chose it is just:
ret = of_get_rs485_mode(...);
if (ret < 0)
return ret;
without any guessing.
quoted
+ */ +int of_get_rs485_mode(struct device_node *np, struct serial_rs485 *rs485conf) +{ + u32 rs485_delay[2]; + int ret; + + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF) || !np) + return 1; + + ret = of_property_read_u32_array(np, "rs485-rts-delay", rs485_delay, 2); + if (!ret) { + rs485conf->delay_rts_before_send = rs485_delay[0]; + rs485conf->delay_rts_after_send = rs485_delay[1]; + } else { + rs485conf->delay_rts_before_send = 0; + rs485conf->delay_rts_after_send = 0; + } + + /* + * clear full-duplex and enabled flags to get to a defined state with + * the two following properties. + */ + rs485conf->flags &= ~(SER_RS485_RX_DURING_TX | SER_RS485_ENABLED); + + if (of_property_read_bool(np, "rs485-rx-during-tx")) + rs485conf->flags |= SER_RS485_RX_DURING_TX; + + if (of_property_read_bool(np, "linux,rs485-enabled-at-boot-time")) + rs485conf->flags |= SER_RS485_ENABLED; + + return 0; +} +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(of_get_rs485_mode);diff --git a/include/linux/serial_core.h b/include/linux/serial_core.h index 1775500294bb..3a89e8925722 100644 --- a/include/linux/serial_core.h +++ b/include/linux/serial_core.h@@ -501,4 +501,17 @@ static inline int uart_handle_break(struct uart_port *port) (cflag) & CRTSCTS || \ !((cflag) & CLOCAL)) +/* + * Common device tree parsing helpers + */ +#ifdef CONFIG_OF_SERIAL +int of_get_rs485_mode(struct device_node *np, struct serial_rs485 *rs485conf); +#else +static inline int of_get_rs485_mode(struct device_node *np, + struct serial_rs485 *rs485conf) +{ + return 1;Again, a real error.
OK, I could agree to return -ENOSYS here. I predict I get complaints about this though and people will do: ret = of_get_rs485_mode(...); if (ret == -ENOSYS) { /* ignore */ } else if (ret < 0) { return ret; } which one might consider troublesome or even wrong. (See the same discussions about 22c403676dbbb7c6f186099527af7f065498ef45 where I wanted to keep -ENOSYS.)
And why not have a "generic" firmware function for this that defaults to the of_ for that platform type if present? What's the odds that acpi will need/want this soon anyway?
I don't know about ACPI and all systems I care about are using dt. So I'd suggest we stick to dt and switch to "generic" if and when the need arises? Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | -- 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