On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 03:20:26PM +0200, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
From: Luca Ceresoli <luca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
An ATR is a device that looks similar to an i2c-mux: it has an I2C
slave "upstream" port and N master "downstream" ports, and forwards
transactions from upstream to the appropriate downstream port. But is
is different in that the forwarded transaction has a different slave
address. The address used on the upstream bus is called the "alias"
and is (potentially) different from the physical slave address of the
downstream chip.
Add a helper file (just like i2c-mux.c for a mux or switch) to allow
implementing ATR features in a device driver. The helper takes care or
adapter creation/destruction and translates addresses at each transaction.
...
i2c-topology
muxes/i2c-mux-gpio
i2c-sysfs
+ muxes/i2c-atr
Doesn't make sense to group muxes/*, that they are following each other?
...
+I2C ADDRESS TRANSLATOR (ATR)
+M: Luca Ceresoli <luca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Hmm... Are you going to maintain this? Or Review? Why not?
+L: linux-i2c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
+S: Maintained
+F: drivers/i2c/i2c-atr.c
+F: include/linux/i2c-atr.h
...
+ void *new_buf = kmalloc_array(num, sizeof(chan->orig_addrs[0]),
+ GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (new_buf == NULL)
+ return -ENOMEM;
Isn't it better to write this as
void *new_buf;
new_buf = kmalloc_array(num, sizeof(chan->orig_addrs[0]), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!new_buf)
return -ENOMEM;
Remarks:
- note the style of the conditional
- why is it void?
Also, does it make sense to use krealloc_array() or is it complete replacement
of the data?
+ kfree(chan->orig_addrs);
+ chan->orig_addrs = new_buf;
+ chan->orig_addrs_size = num;
...
+static void i2c_atr_unmap_msgs(struct i2c_atr_chan *chan, struct i2c_msg msgs[],
+ int num)
[] in the function parameter is longer than * and actually doesn't make
difference in C. Ditto for the rest of similar cases.
...
+static int i2c_atr_smbus_xfer(struct i2c_adapter *adap, u16 addr,
+ unsigned short flags, char read_write, u8 command,
+ int size, union i2c_smbus_data *data)
Can flags be fixed size (yes I understand that in our case short would probably
never be different to u16, but for the sake of clearness)?
...
+static int i2c_atr_attach_client(struct i2c_adapter *adapter,
+ const struct i2c_board_info *info,
+ const struct i2c_client *client)
+{
+ struct i2c_atr_chan *chan = adapter->algo_data;
+ struct i2c_atr *atr = chan->atr;
+ struct i2c_atr_cli2alias_pair *c2a;
+ u16 alias_id = 0;
Can we split assignment from the definition and locate it closer to the first
use?
+ int ret = 0;
Useless assignment.
+
+ c2a = kzalloc(sizeof(*c2a), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!c2a)
+ return -ENOMEM;
+
+ ret = atr->ops->attach_client(atr, chan->chan_id, info, client,
+ &alias_id);
On one line looks better.
+ if (ret)
+ goto err_free;
+ if (alias_id == 0) {
+ ret = -EINVAL;
+ goto err_free;
+ }
+
+ c2a->client = client;
+ c2a->alias = alias_id;
+ list_add(&c2a->node, &chan->alias_list);
+
+ return 0;
+
+err_free:
+ kfree(c2a);
+ return ret;
+}
...
+int i2c_atr_add_adapter(struct i2c_atr *atr, u32 chan_id,
+ struct fwnode_handle *bus_handle)
+{
+ struct i2c_adapter *parent = atr->parent;
+ struct device *dev = atr->dev;
+ struct i2c_atr_chan *chan;
+ char *symlink_name;
+ int ret;
+
+ if (chan_id >= atr->max_adapters) {
+ dev_err(dev, "No room for more i2c-atr adapters\n");
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
+ if (atr->adapter[chan_id]) {
+ dev_err(dev, "Adapter %d already present\n", chan_id);
+ return -EEXIST;
+ }
+
+ chan = kzalloc(sizeof(*chan), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!chan)
+ return -ENOMEM;
+
+ chan->atr = atr;
+ chan->chan_id = chan_id;
+ INIT_LIST_HEAD(&chan->alias_list);
+ mutex_init(&chan->orig_addrs_lock);
+
+ snprintf(chan->adap.name, sizeof(chan->adap.name), "i2c-%d-atr-%d",
+ i2c_adapter_id(parent), chan_id);
+ chan->adap.owner = THIS_MODULE;
+ chan->adap.algo = &atr->algo;
+ chan->adap.algo_data = chan;
+ chan->adap.dev.parent = dev;
+ chan->adap.retries = parent->retries;
+ chan->adap.timeout = parent->timeout;
+ chan->adap.quirks = parent->quirks;
+ chan->adap.lock_ops = &i2c_atr_lock_ops;
+ chan->adap.attach_ops = &i2c_atr_attach_ops;
+
+ if (bus_handle) {
+ device_set_node(&chan->adap.dev, fwnode_handle_get(bus_handle));
+ } else {
+ struct fwnode_handle *atr_node;
+ struct fwnode_handle *child;
+ u32 reg;
+
+ atr_node = device_get_named_child_node(dev, "i2c-atr");
+
+ fwnode_for_each_child_node(atr_node, child) {
+ ret = fwnode_property_read_u32(child, "reg", ®);
+ if (ret)
+ continue;
+ if (chan_id == reg)
+ break;
+ }
+
+ device_set_node(&chan->adap.dev, child);
+ fwnode_handle_put(atr_node);
+ }
It seems you have OF independent code, but by some reason you included of.h
instead of property.h. Am I right?
+ ret = i2c_add_adapter(&chan->adap);
+ if (ret) {
+ dev_err(dev, "failed to add atr-adapter %u (error=%d)\n",
+ chan_id, ret);
+ goto err_add_adapter;
+ }
+
+ symlink_name = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "channel-%u", chan_id);
No NULL check?
+ WARN(sysfs_create_link(&chan->adap.dev.kobj, &dev->kobj, "atr_device"),
+ "can't create symlink to atr device\n");
+ WARN(sysfs_create_link(&dev->kobj, &chan->adap.dev.kobj, symlink_name),
+ "can't create symlink for channel %u\n", chan_id);
Why WARNs? sysfs has already some in their implementation.
+
+ kfree(symlink_name);
+
+ dev_dbg(dev, "Added ATR child bus %d\n", i2c_adapter_id(&chan->adap));
+
+ atr->adapter[chan_id] = &chan->adap;
+ return 0;
+
+err_add_adapter:
+ mutex_destroy(&chan->orig_addrs_lock);
+ kfree(chan);
+ return ret;
+}
...
+ struct fwnode_handle *fwnode = adap->dev.fwnode;
Please don't dereference fwnode like this, we have dev_fwnode() for that.
...
+ if (atr->adapter[chan_id] == NULL) {
!
+ dev_err(dev, "Adapter %d does not exist\n", chan_id);
+ return;
+ }
...
+ snprintf(symlink_name, sizeof(symlink_name),
+ "channel-%u", chan->chan_id);
Once line?
...
+ atr_size = struct_size(atr, adapter, max_adapters);
+ if (atr_size == SIZE_MAX)
+ return ERR_PTR(-EOVERFLOW);
Dunno if you really need this to be separated from devm_kzalloc(), either way
you will get an error, but in embedded case it will be -ENOMEM.
+ atr = devm_kzalloc(dev, atr_size, GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!atr)
+ return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
...
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(i2c_atr_delete);
I would put these to their own namespace from day 1.
...
+/**
+ * Helper to add I2C ATR features to a device driver.
+ */
??? Copy'n'paste typo?
+struct i2c_atr {
+ /* private: internal use only */
+
+ struct i2c_adapter *parent;
+ struct device *dev;
+ const struct i2c_atr_ops *ops;
+
+ void *priv;
+
+ struct i2c_algorithm algo;
+ struct mutex lock;
+ int max_adapters;
+
+ struct i2c_adapter *adapter[0];
No VLAs.
+};
...
+int i2c_atr_add_adapter(struct i2c_atr *atr, u32 chan_id,
+ struct fwnode_handle *bus_np);
Missing
struct fwnode_handle;
at the top of the file?