Re: [PATCH] tty/serial: at91: restore dynamic driver binding

[Nicolas Ferre]

Le 23/02/2016 17:59, Romain Izard a écrit :
> In commit c39dfebc7798956fd2140ae6321786ff35da30c3, the modular support
> code for atmel_serial was removed, as the driver cannot be built as a
> module. Because no use case was proposed, the dynamic driver binding
> support was removed as well.
> 
> The atmel_serial driver can manage up to 7 serial controllers, which are
> multiplexed with other functions. For example, in the Atmel SAMA5D2, the
> Flexcom controllers can work as USART, SPI or I2C controllers, and on
> all Atmel devices serial lines can be reconfigured as GPIOs.

Well this paragraph somehow puzzled me and made me think that you only
have to keep the serial port as "disabled" in the DT to achieve what you
had had in mind.

> My use case uses GPIOs to transfer a firmware update using a custom
> protocol on the lines used as a serial port during the normal life of
> the device. If it is not possible to unbind the atmel_serial driver, the
> GPIO lines remain reserved and prevent this case from working.

Yes, here I understand better. Your use case is somewhat uncommon as
your SoC pads can be configured for two different uses with two
different drivers in front of your hardware device...

> This patch reinstates the atmel_serial_remove function, and fixes it as
> it failed to clear the "clk" field on removal, triggering an oops when
> a device was bound again after being unbound.

Well, okay. As the modification is not that big and that the solution is
pretty elegant, I'll take it.


> Signed-off-by: Romain Izard <romain.izard.pro@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/tty/serial/atmel_serial.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>  1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/atmel_serial.c b/drivers/tty/serial/atmel_serial.c
> index 1c0884d8ef32..59e241723edc 100644
> --- a/drivers/tty/serial/atmel_serial.c
> +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/atmel_serial.c
> @@ -2759,14 +2759,38 @@ err:
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> +static int atmel_serial_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> +	struct uart_port *port = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> +	struct atmel_uart_port *atmel_port = to_atmel_uart_port(port);
> +	int ret = 0;
> +
> +	tasklet_kill(&atmel_port->tasklet);
> +
> +	device_init_wakeup(&pdev->dev, 0);
> +
> +	ret = uart_remove_one_port(&atmel_uart, port);
> +
> +	kfree(atmel_port->rx_ring.buf);
> +
> +	/* "port" is allocated statically, so we shouldn't free it */
> +
> +	clear_bit(port->line, atmel_ports_in_use);
> +
> +	clk_put(atmel_port->clk);
> +	atmel_port->clk = NULL;
> +
> +	return ret;
> +}
> +
>  static struct platform_driver atmel_serial_driver = {
>  	.probe		= atmel_serial_probe,
> +	.remove		= atmel_serial_remove,
>  	.suspend	= atmel_serial_suspend,
>  	.resume		= atmel_serial_resume,
>  	.driver		= {
> -		.name			= "atmel_usart",
> -		.of_match_table		= of_match_ptr(atmel_serial_dt_ids),
> -		.suppress_bind_attrs    = true,
> +		.name	= "atmel_usart",
> +		.of_match_table	= of_match_ptr(atmel_serial_dt_ids),

The 2 modifications above are not related to the patch: keep them like
they were event if it's not as pretty as you would like...

>  	},
>  };
>  
> 

Thanks, bye.

-- 
Nicolas Ferre