| Message ID | 20250521-dev-adp5589-fw-v4-2-f2c988d7a7a0@analog.com |
|---|---|
| State | Handled Elsewhere |
| Headers | show |
| Series | mfd: adp5585: support keymap events and drop legacy Input driver | expand |
On Wed, 21 May 2025, Nuno Sá via B4 Relay wrote: > From: Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@analog.com> > > Not all devices (features) of the adp5585 device are mandatory to be > used in all platforms. Hence, check what's given in FW and dynamically > create the mfd_cell array to be given to devm_mfd_add_devices(). > > Signed-off-by: Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@analog.com> > --- > drivers/mfd/adp5585.c | 48 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- > 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/mfd/adp5585.c b/drivers/mfd/adp5585.c > index 160e0b38106a6d78f7d4b7c866cb603d96ea673e..806867c56d6fb4ef1f461af26a424a3a05f46575 100644 > --- a/drivers/mfd/adp5585.c > +++ b/drivers/mfd/adp5585.c > @@ -17,7 +17,13 @@ > #include <linux/regmap.h> > #include <linux/types.h> > > -static const struct mfd_cell adp5585_devs[] = { > +enum { > + ADP5585_DEV_GPIO, > + ADP5585_DEV_PWM, > + ADP5585_DEV_MAX > +}; > + > +static const struct mfd_cell adp5585_devs[ADP5585_DEV_MAX] = { > { .name = "adp5585-gpio", }, > { .name = "adp5585-pwm", }, > }; > @@ -110,6 +116,37 @@ static const struct regmap_config adp5585_regmap_configs[] = { > }, > }; > > +static void adp5585_remove_devices(void *dev) > +{ > + mfd_remove_devices(dev); > +} > + > +static int adp5585_add_devices(struct device *dev) > +{ > + int ret; > + > + if (device_property_present(dev, "#pwm-cells")) { > + ret = mfd_add_devices(dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO, > + &adp5585_devs[ADP5585_DEV_PWM], 1, NULL, 0, NULL); > + if (ret) > + return dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "Failed to add pwm device\n"); PWM is an acronym, it should be capitalised. > + } > + > + if (device_property_present(dev, "#gpio-cells")) { > + ret = mfd_add_devices(dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO, > + &adp5585_devs[ADP5585_DEV_GPIO], 1, NULL, 0, NULL); > + if (ret) { > + ret = dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "Failed to add gpio device\n"); Same with GPIO. > + goto out_error; > + } > + } > + > + return devm_add_action_or_reset(dev, adp5585_remove_devices, dev); We have 2 of these now. Why do we need lots of unbinding functions? What's wrong .remove() or devm_*()? > +out_error: > + mfd_remove_devices(dev); > + return ret; > +} > + > static int adp5585_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c) > { > const struct regmap_config *regmap_config; > @@ -138,14 +175,7 @@ static int adp5585_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c) > return dev_err_probe(&i2c->dev, -ENODEV, > "Invalid device ID 0x%02x\n", id); > > - ret = devm_mfd_add_devices(&i2c->dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO, > - adp5585_devs, ARRAY_SIZE(adp5585_devs), > - NULL, 0, NULL); > - if (ret) > - return dev_err_probe(&i2c->dev, ret, > - "Failed to add child devices\n"); > - > - return 0; > + return adp5585_add_devices(&i2c->dev); > } > > static int adp5585_suspend(struct device *dev) > > -- > 2.49.0 > >
On Fri, 2025-05-23 at 15:51 +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > On Wed, 21 May 2025, Nuno Sá via B4 Relay wrote: > > > From: Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@analog.com> > > > > Not all devices (features) of the adp5585 device are mandatory to be > > used in all platforms. Hence, check what's given in FW and dynamically > > create the mfd_cell array to be given to devm_mfd_add_devices(). > > > > Signed-off-by: Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@analog.com> > > --- > > drivers/mfd/adp5585.c | 48 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- > > 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/mfd/adp5585.c b/drivers/mfd/adp5585.c > > index > > 160e0b38106a6d78f7d4b7c866cb603d96ea673e..806867c56d6fb4ef1f461af26a424a3a05 > > f46575 100644 > > --- a/drivers/mfd/adp5585.c > > +++ b/drivers/mfd/adp5585.c > > @@ -17,7 +17,13 @@ > > #include <linux/regmap.h> > > #include <linux/types.h> > > > > -static const struct mfd_cell adp5585_devs[] = { > > +enum { > > + ADP5585_DEV_GPIO, > > + ADP5585_DEV_PWM, > > + ADP5585_DEV_MAX > > +}; > > + > > +static const struct mfd_cell adp5585_devs[ADP5585_DEV_MAX] = { > > { .name = "adp5585-gpio", }, > > { .name = "adp5585-pwm", }, > > }; > > @@ -110,6 +116,37 @@ static const struct regmap_config > > adp5585_regmap_configs[] = { > > }, > > }; > > > > +static void adp5585_remove_devices(void *dev) > > +{ > > + mfd_remove_devices(dev); > > +} > > + > > +static int adp5585_add_devices(struct device *dev) > > +{ > > + int ret; > > + > > + if (device_property_present(dev, "#pwm-cells")) { > > + ret = mfd_add_devices(dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO, > > + &adp5585_devs[ADP5585_DEV_PWM], 1, > > NULL, 0, NULL); > > + if (ret) > > + return dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "Failed to add pwm > > device\n"); > > PWM is an acronym, it should be capitalised. > > > + } > > + > > + if (device_property_present(dev, "#gpio-cells")) { > > + ret = mfd_add_devices(dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO, > > + &adp5585_devs[ADP5585_DEV_GPIO], 1, > > NULL, 0, NULL); > > + if (ret) { > > + ret = dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "Failed to add gpio > > device\n"); > > Same with GPIO. > > > + goto out_error; > > + } > > + } > > + > > + return devm_add_action_or_reset(dev, adp5585_remove_devices, dev); > > We have 2 of these now. > > Why do we need lots of unbinding functions? > > What's wrong .remove() or devm_*()? I do mention in the cover why I did not used devm_mfd_add_devices(). We would be adding an action per device and mfd_remove_devices() removes all of them in one call. Not that is an issue (I believe subsequent calls with be kind of no-ops) but this way felt more correct. - Nuno Sá > > > +out_error: > > + mfd_remove_devices(dev); > > + return ret; > > +} > > + > > static int adp5585_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c) > > { > > const struct regmap_config *regmap_config; > > @@ -138,14 +175,7 @@ static int adp5585_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c) > > return dev_err_probe(&i2c->dev, -ENODEV, > > "Invalid device ID 0x%02x\n", id); > > > > - ret = devm_mfd_add_devices(&i2c->dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO, > > - adp5585_devs, ARRAY_SIZE(adp5585_devs), > > - NULL, 0, NULL); > > - if (ret) > > - return dev_err_probe(&i2c->dev, ret, > > - "Failed to add child devices\n"); > > - > > - return 0; > > + return adp5585_add_devices(&i2c->dev); > > } > > > > static int adp5585_suspend(struct device *dev) > > > > -- > > 2.49.0 > > > >
On Fri, 23 May 2025, Nuno Sá wrote: > On Fri, 2025-05-23 at 15:51 +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > On Wed, 21 May 2025, Nuno Sá via B4 Relay wrote: > > > > > From: Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@analog.com> > > > > > > Not all devices (features) of the adp5585 device are mandatory to be > > > used in all platforms. Hence, check what's given in FW and dynamically > > > create the mfd_cell array to be given to devm_mfd_add_devices(). > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@analog.com> > > > --- > > > drivers/mfd/adp5585.c | 48 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- > > > 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/mfd/adp5585.c b/drivers/mfd/adp5585.c > > > index > > > 160e0b38106a6d78f7d4b7c866cb603d96ea673e..806867c56d6fb4ef1f461af26a424a3a05 > > > f46575 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/mfd/adp5585.c > > > +++ b/drivers/mfd/adp5585.c > > > @@ -17,7 +17,13 @@ > > > #include <linux/regmap.h> > > > #include <linux/types.h> > > > > > > -static const struct mfd_cell adp5585_devs[] = { > > > +enum { > > > + ADP5585_DEV_GPIO, > > > + ADP5585_DEV_PWM, > > > + ADP5585_DEV_MAX > > > +}; > > > + > > > +static const struct mfd_cell adp5585_devs[ADP5585_DEV_MAX] = { > > > { .name = "adp5585-gpio", }, > > > { .name = "adp5585-pwm", }, > > > }; > > > @@ -110,6 +116,37 @@ static const struct regmap_config > > > adp5585_regmap_configs[] = { > > > }, > > > }; > > > > > > +static void adp5585_remove_devices(void *dev) > > > +{ > > > + mfd_remove_devices(dev); > > > +} > > > + > > > +static int adp5585_add_devices(struct device *dev) > > > +{ > > > + int ret; > > > + > > > + if (device_property_present(dev, "#pwm-cells")) { > > > + ret = mfd_add_devices(dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO, > > > + &adp5585_devs[ADP5585_DEV_PWM], 1, > > > NULL, 0, NULL); > > > + if (ret) > > > + return dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "Failed to add pwm > > > device\n"); > > > > PWM is an acronym, it should be capitalised. > > > > > + } > > > + > > > + if (device_property_present(dev, "#gpio-cells")) { > > > + ret = mfd_add_devices(dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO, > > > + &adp5585_devs[ADP5585_DEV_GPIO], 1, > > > NULL, 0, NULL); > > > + if (ret) { > > > + ret = dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "Failed to add gpio > > > device\n"); > > > > Same with GPIO. > > > > > + goto out_error; > > > + } > > > + } > > > + > > > + return devm_add_action_or_reset(dev, adp5585_remove_devices, dev); > > > > We have 2 of these now. > > > > Why do we need lots of unbinding functions? > > > > What's wrong .remove() or devm_*()? > > I do mention in the cover why I did not used devm_mfd_add_devices(). We would be > adding an action per device and mfd_remove_devices() removes all of them in one > call. Not that is an issue (I believe subsequent calls with be kind of no-ops) > but this way felt more correct. I haven't seen another device add a .remove() equivalent per device. Why do you need it? What's the use-case where this would become critical?
On Fri, 2025-05-23 at 16:19 +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > On Fri, 23 May 2025, Nuno Sá wrote: > > > On Fri, 2025-05-23 at 15:51 +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > > On Wed, 21 May 2025, Nuno Sá via B4 Relay wrote: > > > > > > > From: Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@analog.com> > > > > > > > > Not all devices (features) of the adp5585 device are mandatory to be > > > > used in all platforms. Hence, check what's given in FW and dynamically > > > > create the mfd_cell array to be given to devm_mfd_add_devices(). > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@analog.com> > > > > --- > > > > drivers/mfd/adp5585.c | 48 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- > > > > ---- > > > > 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/mfd/adp5585.c b/drivers/mfd/adp5585.c > > > > index > > > > 160e0b38106a6d78f7d4b7c866cb603d96ea673e..806867c56d6fb4ef1f461af26a424a > > > > 3a05 > > > > f46575 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/mfd/adp5585.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/mfd/adp5585.c > > > > @@ -17,7 +17,13 @@ > > > > #include <linux/regmap.h> > > > > #include <linux/types.h> > > > > > > > > -static const struct mfd_cell adp5585_devs[] = { > > > > +enum { > > > > + ADP5585_DEV_GPIO, > > > > + ADP5585_DEV_PWM, > > > > + ADP5585_DEV_MAX > > > > +}; > > > > + > > > > +static const struct mfd_cell adp5585_devs[ADP5585_DEV_MAX] = { > > > > { .name = "adp5585-gpio", }, > > > > { .name = "adp5585-pwm", }, > > > > }; > > > > @@ -110,6 +116,37 @@ static const struct regmap_config > > > > adp5585_regmap_configs[] = { > > > > }, > > > > }; > > > > > > > > +static void adp5585_remove_devices(void *dev) > > > > +{ > > > > + mfd_remove_devices(dev); > > > > +} > > > > + > > > > +static int adp5585_add_devices(struct device *dev) > > > > +{ > > > > + int ret; > > > > + > > > > + if (device_property_present(dev, "#pwm-cells")) { > > > > + ret = mfd_add_devices(dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO, > > > > + &adp5585_devs[ADP5585_DEV_PWM], > > > > 1, > > > > NULL, 0, NULL); > > > > + if (ret) > > > > + return dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "Failed to add > > > > pwm > > > > device\n"); > > > > > > PWM is an acronym, it should be capitalised. > > > > > > > + } > > > > + > > > > + if (device_property_present(dev, "#gpio-cells")) { > > > > + ret = mfd_add_devices(dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO, > > > > + &adp5585_devs[ADP5585_DEV_GPIO], > > > > 1, > > > > NULL, 0, NULL); > > > > + if (ret) { > > > > + ret = dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "Failed to add > > > > gpio > > > > device\n"); > > > > > > Same with GPIO. > > > > > > > + goto out_error; > > > > + } > > > > + } > > > > + > > > > + return devm_add_action_or_reset(dev, adp5585_remove_devices, > > > > dev); > > > > > > We have 2 of these now. > > > > > > Why do we need lots of unbinding functions? > > > > > > What's wrong .remove() or devm_*()? > > > > I do mention in the cover why I did not used devm_mfd_add_devices(). We > > would be > > adding an action per device and mfd_remove_devices() removes all of them in > > one > > call. Not that is an issue (I believe subsequent calls with be kind of no- > > ops) > > but this way felt more correct. > > I haven't seen another device add a .remove() equivalent per device. > > Why do you need it? What's the use-case where this would become critical? No sure I'm following you. I don't need a .remove() per device (or it is not critical to have one). I just went with this because devm_mfd_add_devices() would be adding more devres_add() than what we need given that mfd_remove_devices() removes all child devices at once. So, logically, the above makes sense to me. Now, I'm ok if you say, don't bother with this and just use devm_mfd_add_devices() on every device we want to add. - Nuno Sá
On Fri, 23 May 2025, Nuno Sá wrote: > On Fri, 2025-05-23 at 16:19 +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > On Fri, 23 May 2025, Nuno Sá wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 2025-05-23 at 15:51 +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > On Wed, 21 May 2025, Nuno Sá via B4 Relay wrote: > > > > > > > > > From: Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@analog.com> > > > > > > > > > > Not all devices (features) of the adp5585 device are mandatory to be > > > > > used in all platforms. Hence, check what's given in FW and dynamically > > > > > create the mfd_cell array to be given to devm_mfd_add_devices(). > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@analog.com> > > > > > --- > > > > > drivers/mfd/adp5585.c | 48 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- > > > > > ---- > > > > > 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/mfd/adp5585.c b/drivers/mfd/adp5585.c > > > > > index > > > > > 160e0b38106a6d78f7d4b7c866cb603d96ea673e..806867c56d6fb4ef1f461af26a424a > > > > > 3a05 > > > > > f46575 100644 > > > > > --- a/drivers/mfd/adp5585.c > > > > > +++ b/drivers/mfd/adp5585.c > > > > > @@ -17,7 +17,13 @@ > > > > > #include <linux/regmap.h> > > > > > #include <linux/types.h> > > > > > > > > > > -static const struct mfd_cell adp5585_devs[] = { > > > > > +enum { > > > > > + ADP5585_DEV_GPIO, > > > > > + ADP5585_DEV_PWM, > > > > > + ADP5585_DEV_MAX > > > > > +}; > > > > > + > > > > > +static const struct mfd_cell adp5585_devs[ADP5585_DEV_MAX] = { > > > > > { .name = "adp5585-gpio", }, > > > > > { .name = "adp5585-pwm", }, > > > > > }; > > > > > @@ -110,6 +116,37 @@ static const struct regmap_config > > > > > adp5585_regmap_configs[] = { > > > > > }, > > > > > }; > > > > > > > > > > +static void adp5585_remove_devices(void *dev) > > > > > +{ > > > > > + mfd_remove_devices(dev); > > > > > +} > > > > > + > > > > > +static int adp5585_add_devices(struct device *dev) > > > > > +{ > > > > > + int ret; > > > > > + > > > > > + if (device_property_present(dev, "#pwm-cells")) { > > > > > + ret = mfd_add_devices(dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO, > > > > > + &adp5585_devs[ADP5585_DEV_PWM], > > > > > 1, > > > > > NULL, 0, NULL); > > > > > + if (ret) > > > > > + return dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "Failed to add > > > > > pwm > > > > > device\n"); > > > > > > > > PWM is an acronym, it should be capitalised. > > > > > > > > > + } > > > > > + > > > > > + if (device_property_present(dev, "#gpio-cells")) { > > > > > + ret = mfd_add_devices(dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO, > > > > > + &adp5585_devs[ADP5585_DEV_GPIO], > > > > > 1, > > > > > NULL, 0, NULL); > > > > > + if (ret) { > > > > > + ret = dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "Failed to add > > > > > gpio > > > > > device\n"); > > > > > > > > Same with GPIO. > > > > > > > > > + goto out_error; > > > > > + } > > > > > + } > > > > > + > > > > > + return devm_add_action_or_reset(dev, adp5585_remove_devices, > > > > > dev); > > > > > > > > We have 2 of these now. > > > > > > > > Why do we need lots of unbinding functions? > > > > > > > > What's wrong .remove() or devm_*()? > > > > > > I do mention in the cover why I did not used devm_mfd_add_devices(). We > > > would be > > > adding an action per device and mfd_remove_devices() removes all of them in > > > one > > > call. Not that is an issue (I believe subsequent calls with be kind of no- > > > ops) > > > but this way felt more correct. > > > > I haven't seen another device add a .remove() equivalent per device. > > > > Why do you need it? What's the use-case where this would become critical? > > No sure I'm following you. I don't need a .remove() per device (or it is not > critical to have one). I just went with this because devm_mfd_add_devices() > would be adding more devres_add() than what we need given that > mfd_remove_devices() removes all child devices at once. So, logically, the above > makes sense to me. Now, I'm ok if you say, don't bother with this and just use > devm_mfd_add_devices() on every device we want to add. If there is no specific reason for using it this way, I would simply stick with the usual semantics and devm_* it.
diff --git a/drivers/mfd/adp5585.c b/drivers/mfd/adp5585.c index 160e0b38106a6d78f7d4b7c866cb603d96ea673e..806867c56d6fb4ef1f461af26a424a3a05f46575 100644 --- a/drivers/mfd/adp5585.c +++ b/drivers/mfd/adp5585.c @@ -17,7 +17,13 @@ #include <linux/regmap.h> #include <linux/types.h> -static const struct mfd_cell adp5585_devs[] = { +enum { + ADP5585_DEV_GPIO, + ADP5585_DEV_PWM, + ADP5585_DEV_MAX +}; + +static const struct mfd_cell adp5585_devs[ADP5585_DEV_MAX] = { { .name = "adp5585-gpio", }, { .name = "adp5585-pwm", }, }; @@ -110,6 +116,37 @@ static const struct regmap_config adp5585_regmap_configs[] = { }, }; +static void adp5585_remove_devices(void *dev) +{ + mfd_remove_devices(dev); +} + +static int adp5585_add_devices(struct device *dev) +{ + int ret; + + if (device_property_present(dev, "#pwm-cells")) { + ret = mfd_add_devices(dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO, + &adp5585_devs[ADP5585_DEV_PWM], 1, NULL, 0, NULL); + if (ret) + return dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "Failed to add pwm device\n"); + } + + if (device_property_present(dev, "#gpio-cells")) { + ret = mfd_add_devices(dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO, + &adp5585_devs[ADP5585_DEV_GPIO], 1, NULL, 0, NULL); + if (ret) { + ret = dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "Failed to add gpio device\n"); + goto out_error; + } + } + + return devm_add_action_or_reset(dev, adp5585_remove_devices, dev); +out_error: + mfd_remove_devices(dev); + return ret; +} + static int adp5585_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c) { const struct regmap_config *regmap_config; @@ -138,14 +175,7 @@ static int adp5585_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c) return dev_err_probe(&i2c->dev, -ENODEV, "Invalid device ID 0x%02x\n", id); - ret = devm_mfd_add_devices(&i2c->dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO, - adp5585_devs, ARRAY_SIZE(adp5585_devs), - NULL, 0, NULL); - if (ret) - return dev_err_probe(&i2c->dev, ret, - "Failed to add child devices\n"); - - return 0; + return adp5585_add_devices(&i2c->dev); } static int adp5585_suspend(struct device *dev)