Re: [PATCH 2/3] spi / ACPI: add ACPI enumeration support

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Saturday, November 03, 2012 10:13:10 PM Mika Westerberg wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 03, 2012 at 01:42:02PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 1:46 AM, Mika Westerberg
> > <mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > ACPI 5 introduced SPISerialBus resource that allows us to enumerate and
> > > configure the SPI slave devices behind the SPI controller. This patch adds
> > > support for this to the SPI core.
> > >
> > > In addition we bind ACPI nodes to SPI devices. This makes it possible for
> > > the slave drivers to get the ACPI handle for further configuration.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/spi/spi.c |  231 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > >  1 file changed, 230 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi.c b/drivers/spi/spi.c
> > > index 84c2861..de22a6e 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/spi/spi.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/spi/spi.c
> > > @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@
> > >  #include <linux/sched.h>
> > >  #include <linux/delay.h>
> > >  #include <linux/kthread.h>
> > > +#include <linux/acpi.h>
> > >
> > >  static void spidev_release(struct device *dev)
> > >  {
> > > @@ -93,6 +94,10 @@ static int spi_match_device(struct device *dev, struct device_driver *drv)
> > >         if (of_driver_match_device(dev, drv))
> > >                 return 1;
> > >
> > > +       /* Then try ACPI */
> > > +       if (acpi_driver_match_device(dev, drv))
> > > +               return 1;
> > > +
> > >         if (sdrv->id_table)
> > >                 return !!spi_match_id(sdrv->id_table, spi);
> > >
> > > @@ -888,6 +893,227 @@ static void of_register_spi_devices(struct spi_master *master)
> > >  static void of_register_spi_devices(struct spi_master *master) { }
> > >  #endif
> > >
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
> > > +struct acpi_spi {
> > > +       acpi_status (*callback)(struct acpi_device *, void *);
> > > +       void *data;
> > > +};
> > > +
> > > +static acpi_status acpi_spi_enumerate_device(acpi_handle handle, u32 level,
> > > +                                            void *data, void **return_value)
> > > +{
> > > +       struct acpi_spi *acpi_spi = data;
> > > +       struct acpi_device *adev;
> > > +
> > > +       if (acpi_bus_get_device(handle, &adev))
> > > +               return AE_OK;
> > > +       if (acpi_bus_get_status(adev) || !adev->status.present)
> > > +               return AE_OK;
> > > +
> > > +       return acpi_spi->callback(adev, acpi_spi->data);
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static acpi_status acpi_spi_enumerate(acpi_handle handle,
> > > +       acpi_status (*callback)(struct acpi_device *, void *), void *data)
> > > +{
> > > +       struct acpi_spi acpi_spi;
> > > +
> > > +       acpi_spi.callback = callback;
> > > +       acpi_spi.data = data;
> > > +
> > > +       return acpi_walk_namespace(ACPI_TYPE_DEVICE, handle, 1,
> > > +                                  acpi_spi_enumerate_device, NULL,
> > > +                                  &acpi_spi, NULL);
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +struct acpi_spi_device_info {
> > > +       struct spi_device *spi;
> > > +       int triggering;
> > > +       int polarity;
> > > +       int gsi;
> > > +       bool valid;
> > > +};
> > > +
> > > +static acpi_status acpi_spi_add_resources(struct acpi_resource *res, void *data)
> > > +{
> > > +       struct acpi_spi_device_info *info = data;
> > > +       struct acpi_resource_spi_serialbus *sb;
> > > +       struct spi_device *spi = info->spi;
> > > +
> > > +       switch (res->type) {
> > > +       case ACPI_RESOURCE_TYPE_SERIAL_BUS:
> > > +               sb = &res->data.spi_serial_bus;
> > > +               if (sb->type == ACPI_RESOURCE_SERIAL_TYPE_SPI) {
> > > +                       spi->chip_select = sb->device_selection;
> > > +                       spi->max_speed_hz = sb->connection_speed;
> > > +
> > > +                       /* Mode (clock phase/polarity/etc. */
> > > +                       if (sb->clock_phase == ACPI_SPI_SECOND_PHASE)
> > > +                               spi->mode |= SPI_CPHA;
> > > +                       if (sb->clock_polarity == ACPI_SPI_START_HIGH)
> > > +                               spi->mode |= SPI_CPOL;
> > > +                       if (sb->device_polarity == ACPI_SPI_ACTIVE_HIGH)
> > > +                               spi->mode |= SPI_CS_HIGH;
> > > +
> > > +                       /*
> > > +                        * The info is valid once we have found the
> > > +                        * SPISerialBus resource.
> > > +                        */
> > > +                       info->valid = true;
> > > +               }
> > > +               break;
> > > +
> > > +       case ACPI_RESOURCE_TYPE_IRQ:
> > > +               info->gsi = res->data.irq.interrupts[0];
> > > +               info->triggering = res->data.irq.triggering;
> > > +               info->polarity = res->data.irq.polarity;
> > > +               break;
> > > +
> > > +       case ACPI_RESOURCE_TYPE_EXTENDED_IRQ:
> > > +               info->gsi = res->data.extended_irq.interrupts[0];
> > > +               info->triggering = res->data.extended_irq.triggering;
> > > +               info->polarity = res->data.extended_irq.polarity;
> > 
> > A driver doesn't seem like the right place for _CRS parsing code.  I
> > think the intent of _CRS is to describe resources that need to be
> > coordinated across all devices, e.g., MMIO space, I/O port space, and
> > IRQs.  Since these resources require system-wide coordination, even
> > when we don't have drivers for some devices, the ACPI core should be
> > able to parse _CRS without needing any device-specific knowledge.
> 
> I think the driver is the only one who really knows the resources it needs
> in order to talk the hardware.
> 
> The purpose of the above code is to extract the resources in a suitable
> form so that we can create a struct spi_device out of them automatically,
> in a similar way than the Device Tree does.
> 
> There are other things which we cannot do in the generic code, such as GPIO
> resources and FixedDMA resources. These should be handled by the actual
> driver with the help of dev->acpi_handle IMO.
> 
> > I know the Linux ACPI core doesn't parse _CRS today, but it should.
> > The only reason we get away with the core ignoring _CRS is because the
> > BIOS sets up most ACPI devices and we never change them.  If we change
> > any resource assignments, we have to know where all the other devices
> > are so we can avoid conflicts.
> 
> I agree but these devices are typically "fixed" so that they wont be
> hot-plugged (although we should prepare for such devices as well) so
> basically we don't need to do change any assignments for resources.
> 
> And if the ACPI core parses the _CRS, how does it pass all the resources to
> the drivers?

Pretty much the same way the $subject patch does.

Instead of parsing the entire subtree below an SPI controller and trying
acpi_spi_add_device() for each device node in there, it could call
acpi_spi_add_device() whenever it finds a device of type
ACPI_RESOURCE_TYPE_SERIAL_BUS/ACPI_RESOURCE_SERIAL_TYPE_SPI.
The only problem is how to pass "master" to it.

So Bjorn, do you have any idea how we could pass the "master" pointer from the
ACPI core to acpi_spi_add_device() in a sensible way?

An alternative might be to store the information obtained from _CRS in
struct acpi_device objects created by the ACPI core while parsing the
namespace.  We do that already for things like _PRW, so we might as well do it
for _CRS.  Then, the SPI core could just walk the subtree of the device hierarchy
below the SPI controller's acpi_device to extract that information.
Maybe that's the way to go?

Rafael


-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/