[V3] bcma: use device from DT (brcm, bus-chipcommon) for SoC GPIO chip

This will allow us to define GPIO-attached devices (LEDs, buttons) in
the the device tree.

Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com>
---
This is based on top of
[PATCH v6] bcma: register bcma as device tree driver
that I hope will reach wireless-next git tree.

V2: Describe axi chilren and make gpio a child of chipcommon core.
V3: Make chipcommon a GPIO controller (avoid extra sub-child)
    Speed up finding OF node in driver_gpio.c
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/bus/bcma.txt | 13 +++++++++++++
 drivers/bcma/driver_gpio.c                     |  6 ++++++
 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+)

On Tuesday 30 September 2014 12:22:26 Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> 
> +The top-level axi bus may contain children representing attached cores
> +(devices). This is needed since some hardware details can't be auto
> +detected (e.g. IRQ numbers). Also some of the cores may be responsible
> +for extra things, e.g. ChipCommon providing access to the GPIO chip.
> +
>  Example:
>  
>         axi@18000000 {
> @@ -17,4 +22,12 @@ Example:
>                 ranges = <0x00000000 0x18000000 0x00100000>;
>                 #address-cells = <1>;
>                 #size-cells = <1>;
> +
> +               chipcommon {
> +                       compatible = "brcm,bus-chipcommon";
> +                       reg = <0x00000000 0x1000>;
> +
> +                       gpio-controller;
> +                       #gpio-cells = <2>;
> +               };
>         };

Looks good.


> diff --git a/drivers/bcma/driver_gpio.c b/drivers/bcma/driver_gpio.c
> index 8ea497c..28bdbe5 100644
> --- a/drivers/bcma/driver_gpio.c
> +++ b/drivers/bcma/driver_gpio.c
> @@ -218,6 +218,12 @@ int bcma_gpio_init(struct bcma_drv_cc *cc)
>  #if IS_BUILTIN(CONFIG_BCM47XX)
>         chip->to_irq            = bcma_gpio_to_irq;
>  #endif
> +#if IS_BUILTIN(CONFIG_OF)
> +       if (cc->core->bus->hosttype == BCMA_HOSTTYPE_SOC)
> +               chip->of_node   = of_find_compatible_node(
> +                                       bus->host_pdev->dev.of_node, NULL,
> +                                       "brcm,bus-chipcommon");
> +#endif
>         switch (cc->core->bus->chipinfo.id) {

This doesn't: you are now searching through all nodes starting at the
axi node rather than searching just through the children.

I think it would be better with the first change in place to set
chip->of_node to cc->core->dev.of_node, and set that pointer in
bcma_bus_scan by matching the 'reg' number. I think that is what
an earlier version of the bcma DT support did in order to find the
IRQs. We no longer need it for that purpose, but it seems like a
good idea anyway, as I expect other bcma_devices to have similar
requirements to add additional properties.

	Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

On 30 September 2014 12:36, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> On Tuesday 30 September 2014 12:22:26 Rafał Miłecki wrote:
>> @@ -218,6 +218,12 @@ int bcma_gpio_init(struct bcma_drv_cc *cc)
>>  #if IS_BUILTIN(CONFIG_BCM47XX)
>>         chip->to_irq            = bcma_gpio_to_irq;
>>  #endif
>> +#if IS_BUILTIN(CONFIG_OF)
>> +       if (cc->core->bus->hosttype == BCMA_HOSTTYPE_SOC)
>> +               chip->of_node   = of_find_compatible_node(
>> +                                       bus->host_pdev->dev.of_node, NULL,
>> +                                       "brcm,bus-chipcommon");
>> +#endif
>>         switch (cc->core->bus->chipinfo.id) {
>
> This doesn't: you are now searching through all nodes starting at the
> axi node rather than searching just through the children.
>
> I think it would be better with the first change in place to set
> chip->of_node to cc->core->dev.of_node, and set that pointer in
> bcma_bus_scan by matching the 'reg' number. I think that is what
> an earlier version of the bcma DT support did in order to find the
> IRQs. We no longer need it for that purpose, but it seems like a
> good idea anyway, as I expect other bcma_devices to have similar
> requirements to add additional properties.

Ohh, of course, I didn't notice that
[PATCH v6] bcma: register bcma as device tree driver
already contains bcma_of_fill_device. This will simplify my search a lot!