Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] Watchdog: sp5100_tco: Add EFCH SMBus controller initialization using MMIO
From: Guenter Roeck
Date: Fri Jan 07 2022 - 12:12:40 EST
On 1/7/22 3:05 AM, Robert Richter wrote:
On 06.01.22 13:07:11, Terry Bowman wrote:
On 1/6/22 12:18 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Wed, Nov 03, 2021 at 11:15:20AM -0500, Terry Bowman wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/sp5100_tco.c b/drivers/watchdog/sp5100_tco.c
index 80ae42ae7aaa..4777e672a8ad 100644
--- a/drivers/watchdog/sp5100_tco.c
+++ b/drivers/watchdog/sp5100_tco.c
@@ -48,12 +48,14 @@
/* internal variables */
enum tco_reg_layout {
- sp5100, sb800, efch
+ sp5100, sb800, efch, efch_mmio
};
struct sp5100_tco {
struct watchdog_device wdd;
void __iomem *tcobase;
+ void __iomem *addr;
+ struct resource *res;
I must admit that I really don't like this code. Both res and
addr are only used during initialization, yet their presence suggests
runtime usage. Any chance to reqork this to not require those variables ?
We did that in an earlier version, see struct efch_cfg of:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-watchdog/patch/20210813213216.54780-1-Terry.Bowman@xxxxxxx/
The motivation of it was the same as you suggested to only use it
during init.
Having it in struct sp5100_tco made things simpler esp. in the
definition of the function interfaces where those new members are
used.
'res' is only used in the context of sp5100_request_region_mmio()
and sp5100_release_region_mmio(), and both are called from
sp5100_tco_setupdevice_mmio(). I do not see a need for carrying it around
anywhere else, including efch_read_pm_reg8() and efch_update_pm_reg8().
efch_read_pm_reg8() is only called from sp5100_tco_setupdevice_mmio(),
and it only uses struct sp5100_tco *tco to get the address. I don't see
why the address can not be passed to it directly.
efch_update_pm_reg8() also uses tco only to get the address. Again, passing
it instead of a pointer to sp5100_tco *tco would easily be possible.
efch_update_pm_reg8() is only called fromm sp5100_tco_setupdevice_mmio(),
where the change would be easy. It is also called from tco_timer_enable(),
which in turn is called from sp5100_tco_timer_init(). This, again, is called
from sp5100_tco_setupdevice_mmio(). Since the first operation in
sp5100_tco_timer_init() is to call tco_timer_enable() and that function
does nothing but calling efch_update_pm_reg8(), it would easily be possible
to pull out that code from tco_timer_enable() and move it into
sp5100_tco_setupdevice_mmio().
So, no, I neither see the need for having the information in struct
sp5100_tco nor for keeping it in its own structure. If you'd merge
sp5100_request_region_mmio() and sp5100_release_region_mmio() into
sp5100_tco_setupdevice_mmio() you would not even need any pointers
to pass the values from sp5100_request_region_mmio(). Otherwise you
could have sp5100_request_region_mmio() return a pointer to res or
an ERR_PTR, and pass the address as pointer parameter.
Guenter
If that init vars are no longer in struct sp5100_tco then callers of
efch_read_pm_reg8() and efch_update_pm_reg8() will need to carry a
pointer to them. To avoid this I see those options:
1) Implement them as global (or a single global struct) and possibly
protect it by a mutex. There is only a single device anyway and we
wouldn't need a protection.
2) Have an own mmio implementation of tco_timer_enable() and/or
sp5100_tco_timer_init().
Yes, v3 will include refactoring to remove 'res' and 'addr'. I will also
correct the trailing newline you mentioned in an earlier email.
Regards,
Terry
enum tco_reg_layout tco_reg_layout;
While at it, tco_reg_layout is also only used during initialization
and can be moved there too. This would raise option 3:
3) Add a pointer of struct sp5100_tco to struct efch_cfg and use that
struct instead in init funtions only. But that causes the most rework
(which would be ok to me).
Going with 3) looks the cleanest way, I would try that. But all
options have its advantages.
-Robert
};