Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] Add GPIO support for Realtek DHC(Digital Home Center) RTD SoCs.
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy@kernel.org>
Date: 2023-12-07 13:45:28
Also in:
linux-gpio, lkml
On Thu, Dec 07, 2023 at 06:07:23PM +0800, TY Chang wrote:
From: Tzuyi Chang <redacted> This driver enables configuration of GPIO direction, GPIO values, GPIO debounce settings and handles GPIO interrupts.
Why gpio-regmap can't be used? ...
+struct rtd_gpio_info {+ u8 *dir_offset; + u8 num_dir; + u8 *dato_offset; + u8 num_dato; + u8 *dati_offset; + u8 num_dati; + u8 *ie_offset; + u8 num_ie; + u8 *dp_offset; + u8 num_dp; + u8 *gpa_offset; + u8 num_gpa; + u8 *gpda_offset; + u8 num_gpda; + u8 *deb_offset; + u8 num_deb;
A lot of wasted space. Can you group pointers followed by u8 members? Note, use `pahole` tool to check the struct layout in C.
+};
...
+struct rtd_gpio {
+ struct platform_device *pdev;Why struct device *dev; is not suffice?
+ const struct rtd_gpio_info *info; + void __iomem *base; + void __iomem *irq_base;
+ struct gpio_chip gpio_chip;
Make this to be the first member, it might reduce some code (due to pointer arithmetics).
+ unsigned int irqs[2]; + spinlock_t lock; +}; + +
One blank line is enough. ...
+static const struct rtd_gpio_info rtd_iso_gpio_info = {
+ .name = "rtd_iso_gpio",
+ .type = RTD_ISO_GPIO,
+ .gpio_base = 0,
+ .num_gpios = 82,
+ .dir_offset = (u8 []){ 0x0, 0x18, 0x2c },
+ .num_dir = 3,
+ .dato_offset = (u8 []){ 0x4, 0x1c, 0x30 },
+ .num_dato = 3,
+ .dati_offset = (u8 []){ 0x8, 0x20, 0x34 },
+ .num_dati = 3,
+ .ie_offset = (u8 []){ 0xc, 0x24, 0x38 },
+ .num_ie = 3,
+ .dp_offset = (u8 []){ 0x10, 0x28, 0x3c },
+ .num_dp = 3,
+ .gpa_offset = (u8 []){ 0x8, 0xe0, 0x90 },
+ .num_gpa = 3,
+ .gpda_offset = (u8 []){ 0xc, 0xe4, 0x94 },
+ .num_gpda = 3,
+ .deb_offset = (u8 []){ 0x44, 0x48, 0x4c, 0x50, 0x54, 0x58, 0x5c,
+ 0x60, 0x64, 0x68, 0x6c },
+ .num_deb = 11,Use ARRAY_SIZE() from array_size.h for all num_* assignments.
+};
...
+static const struct rtd_gpio_info rtd1619_iso_gpio_info = {Ditto.
+};
...
+static const struct rtd_gpio_info rtd1395_iso_gpio_info = {Ditto.
+};
+
+static const struct rtd_gpio_info rtd1295_misc_gpio_info = {Ditto.
+};
+
+static const struct rtd_gpio_info rtd1295_iso_gpio_info = {Ditto.
+};
...
+static int rtd_gpio_dir_offset(struct rtd_gpio *data, unsigned int offset)
+{
+ int index = offset / 32;+ if (index > data->info->num_dir) + return -EINVAL;
When this conditional can be true? Same Q to the similar checks over the code.
+ return data->info->dir_offset[index]; +}
...
+ if (data->info->type == RTD1295_ISO_GPIO) {
+ reg_offset = rtd_gpio_deb_offset(data, 0);
+ if (reg_offset < 0)
+ return reg_offset;
+ shift = 0;
+ deb_val += 1;
+ write_en = BIT(shift + 3);
+ } else if (data->info->type == RTD1295_MISC_GPIO) {
+ reg_offset = rtd_gpio_deb_offset(data, 0);
+ if (reg_offset < 0)
+ return reg_offset;
+ shift = (offset >> 4) * 4;
+ deb_val += 1;
+ write_en = BIT(shift + 3);
+ } else {
+ reg_offset = rtd_gpio_deb_offset(data, offset);
+ if (reg_offset < 0)
+ return reg_offset;
+ shift = (offset % 8) * 4;
+ write_en = BIT(shift + 3);
+ }You should probably have kind of chip_info constant structure that goes via driver_data and will have a callback, so, here you will call one and get all three at once: - register offset; - shift - updated debounce value ...
+static int rtd_gpio_get_direction(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int offset)
+{
+ struct rtd_gpio *data = gpiochip_get_data(chip);
+ unsigned long flags;
+ int reg_offset;
+ u32 val;
+
+ reg_offset = rtd_gpio_dir_offset(data, offset);
+ if (reg_offset < 0)
+ return reg_offset;+ spin_lock_irqsave(&data->lock, flags);
So, is your IRQ chip going to work with CONFIG_PREEMT_RT?
+ val = readl_relaxed(data->base + reg_offset);
+ val &= BIT(offset % 32);
Why this is is under lock?
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&data->lock, flags); + + return val ? GPIO_LINE_DIRECTION_OUT : GPIO_LINE_DIRECTION_IN; +}
...
+static int rtd_gpio_set_direction(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int offset, bool out)
+{+ unsigned long flags;
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&data->lock, flags);
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&data->lock, flags);
Consider to utilise guard() / scoped_guard() from cleanup.h.
+}
...
+static int rtd_gpio_direction_output(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int offset, int value)
+{+ chip->set(chip, offset, value);
Why? Can't you call the function by its name directly?
+ + return rtd_gpio_set_direction(chip, offset, true); +}
...
+static int rtd_gpio_get(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int offset)
+{
+ struct rtd_gpio *data = gpiochip_get_data(chip);
+ int dir_reg_offset, dat_reg_offset;
+ unsigned long flags;
+ u32 val;
+
+ dir_reg_offset = rtd_gpio_dir_offset(data, offset);
+ if (dir_reg_offset < 0)
+ return dir_reg_offset;
+
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&data->lock, flags);
+
+ val = readl_relaxed(data->base + dir_reg_offset);
+ val &= BIT(offset % 32);+ dat_reg_offset = val ? + rtd_gpio_dato_offset(data, offset) : rtd_gpio_dati_offset(data, offset);
Can't you have the direction be cached and already know which offset to use even before the lock?
+ val = readl_relaxed(data->base + dat_reg_offset);
+ val >>= offset % 32; + val &= 0x1;
Why were these operations done under the lock?
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&data->lock, flags); + + return val; +}
...
+static void rtd_gpio_irq_handle(struct irq_desc *desc)
+{
+ int (*get_reg_offset)(struct rtd_gpio *gpio, unsigned int offset);
+ struct rtd_gpio *data = irq_desc_get_handler_data(desc);
+ struct irq_domain *domain = data->gpio_chip.irq.domain;
+ struct irq_chip *chip = irq_desc_get_chip(desc);
+ unsigned int irq = irq_desc_get_irq(desc);
+ int reg_offset;
+ u32 status;+ int hwirq;
Why signed?
+ int i; + int j; + + chained_irq_enter(chip, desc);
+ if (irq == data->irqs[0]) + get_reg_offset = &rtd_gpio_gpa_offset; + else if (irq == data->irqs[1]) + get_reg_offset = &rtd_gpio_gpda_offset;
Can't it be done before entering into chained IRQ handler?
+ for (i = 0; i < data->info->num_gpios; i = i + 31) {31 ?! In any case i += 31 is simply shorter.
+ reg_offset = get_reg_offset(data, i); + if (reg_offset < 0) + return; + + status = readl_relaxed(data->irq_base + reg_offset) >> 1; + writel_relaxed(status << 1, data->irq_base + reg_offset);
+ while (status) {
+ j = __ffs(status);
+ status &= ~BIT(j);NIH for_each_set_bit()
+ hwirq = i + j;
+ if (rtd_gpio_check_ie(data, hwirq)) {
+ int girq = irq_find_mapping(domain, hwirq);
+ u32 irq_type = irq_get_trigger_type(girq);
+
+ if ((irq == data->irqs[1]) && ((irq_type & IRQ_TYPE_SENSE_MASK) !=
+ IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_BOTH))
+ break;+ generic_handle_irq(girq);
Why you can't use generic_handle_domain_irq()?
+ } + } + } + + chained_irq_exit(chip, desc); +}
...
+ u32 mask = BIT(d->hwirq % 32);
Use proper type and getter for hwirq. It's mentioned in the Documentation. ...
+static const struct irq_chip rtd_gpio_irq_chip = {
+ .name = "rtd-gpio",
+ .irq_enable = rtd_gpio_enable_irq,
+ .irq_disable = rtd_gpio_disable_irq,
+ .irq_set_type = rtd_gpio_irq_set_type,+ .flags = IRQCHIP_IMMUTABLE,
Is it? You seems missed something to fulfill the immutability requirements. Please consult with the Documentation, it's all written there.
+};
...
+static const struct of_device_id rtd_gpio_of_matches[] = {
+ { .compatible = "realtek,rtd1295-misc-gpio", .data = &rtd1295_misc_gpio_info },
+ { .compatible = "realtek,rtd1295-iso-gpio", .data = &rtd1295_iso_gpio_info },
+ { .compatible = "realtek,rtd1395-iso-gpio", .data = &rtd1395_iso_gpio_info },
+ { .compatible = "realtek,rtd1619-iso-gpio", .data = &rtd1619_iso_gpio_info },
+ { .compatible = "realtek,rtd1319-iso-gpio", .data = &rtd_iso_gpio_info },
+ { .compatible = "realtek,rtd1619b-iso-gpio", .data = &rtd_iso_gpio_info },
+ { .compatible = "realtek,rtd1319d-iso-gpio", .data = &rtd_iso_gpio_info },
+ { .compatible = "realtek,rtd1315e-iso-gpio", .data = &rtd_iso_gpio_info },+ { },No comma in the terminator entry.
+}; +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, rtd_gpio_of_matches);
Move all these closer to its user (struct platform_device below). ...
+ data->gpio_chip.label = dev_name(&pdev->dev);
dev ...
+ data->gpio_chip.fwnode = dev_fwnode(&pdev->dev);
dev But why setting parent device is not suffice? ...
+static int rtd_gpio_init(void)
+{
+ return platform_driver_register(&rtd_gpio_platform_driver);
+}+
Unneeded blank line.
+subsys_initcall(rtd_gpio_init);
Why? Anything that is not on standard initcall must be justified. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko