Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] pinctrl: st: Enhance the controller to manage unavailable registers

[Maxime Coquelin]

Hi Srini,

On 03/07/2014 11:41 AM, srinivas kandagatla wrote:
> Hi Peppe/Maxime,
> I missed a comment... :-)
>
>
> On 07/03/14 09:41, Maxime COQUELIN wrote:
> > From: Giuseppe Cavallaro <peppe.cavallaro@xxxxxx>
> >
> > This patch adds a new logic inside the st pinctrl to manage
> > an unsupported scenario: some sysconfig are not available!
> >
> > This is the case of STiH407 where, although documented, the
> > following registers from SYSCFG_FLASH have been removed from the SoC.
> >
> > SYSTEM_CONFIG3040
> >     Output Enable pad control for all PIO Alternate Functions
> > and
> > SYSTEM_ CONFIG3050
> >     Pull Up pad control for all PIO Alternate Functions
> >
> > Without managing this condition an imprecise external abort
> > will be detect.
> >
> > To do this the patch also reviews the st_parse_syscfgs
> > and other routines to manipulate the registers only if
> > actually available.
> > In any case, for example the st_parse_syscfgs detected
> > an error condition but no action was made in the
> > st_pctl_probe_dt.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@xxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Giuseppe Cavallaro <peppe.cavallaro@xxxxxx>
> > ---
> >   drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c | 121 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
> >   1 file changed, 75 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c
> > index 9e9b6ea..d1886b4 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c
> > @@ -390,6 +390,19 @@ static const struct st_pctl_data  stih416_data = {
> >   	.alt = 0, .oe = 40, .pu = 50, .od = 60, .rt = 100,
> >   };
> >
> > +static const struct st_pctl_data  stih407_flashdata = {
> > +	.rt_style	= st_retime_style_none,
> > +	.input_delays	= stih416_delays,
> > +	.ninput_delays	= 14,
> > +	.output_delays	= stih416_delays,
> > +	.noutput_delays = 14,
> > +	.alt = 0,
> > +	.oe = -1, /* Not Available */
> > +	.pu = -1, /* Not Available */
> > +	.od = 60,
> > +	.rt = 100,
> > +};
> > +
>
> I think this stih407_flashdata go with the previous patch "pinctrl: st:
> add pinctrl support for the STiH407 SoC"
>
> So that this patch just adds new checks to pinctrl-driver and not
> stih407 related stuff.

Problem is that "oe" and "pu" takes -1 in that patch, and these values 
will be passed directly to devm_regmap_field_alloc without any check.

I propose to apply this patch before "pinctrl: st: add pinctrl support 
for the STiH407 SoC", and move stih407_flashdata as you recommend.

Is it fine for you?

Thanks for the review,
Maxime

> Other than that the patch looks good to me.
>
> >   }
> >
> >   /*
> > @@ -1583,7 +1612,7 @@ static struct of_device_id st_pctl_of_match[] = {
> >   	{ .compatible = "st,stih407-sbc-pinctrl", .data = &stih416_data},
> >   	{ .compatible = "st,stih407-front-pinctrl", .data = &stih416_data},
> >   	{ .compatible = "st,stih407-rear-pinctrl", .data = &stih416_data},
> > -	{ .compatible = "st,stih407-flash-pinctrl", .data = &stih416_data},
> > +	{ .compatible = "st,stih407-flash-pinctrl", .data = &stih407_flashdata},
> Same as first comment.
> >   	{ /* sentinel */ }
> >   };
>
>
> Thanks,
> srini
--
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/