Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] gpio: add driver for Mellanox BlueField GPIO controller

[Bartosz Golaszewski]

År., 20 lut 2019 o 23:07 Shravan Kumar Ramani <sramani@xxxxxxxxxxxx> napisaÅ(a):
>
> This patch adds support for the GPIO controller used by Mellanox
> BlueField SOCs.
>

Starts to look good. Just some minor points.

First: when submitting new versions - please list the changes from the
last one (or even better: all changes between all versions). This is a
small driver, but with bigger patches it's important to know what
changed.

> Reviewed-by: David Woods <dwoods@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Shravan Kumar Ramani <sramani@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/gpio/Kconfig      |   6 ++
>  drivers/gpio/Makefile     |   1 +
>  drivers/gpio/gpio-mlxbf.c | 222 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  3 files changed, 229 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 drivers/gpio/gpio-mlxbf.c
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/Kconfig b/drivers/gpio/Kconfig
> index b5a2845..c950fe8 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpio/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/Kconfig
> @@ -1292,6 +1292,12 @@ config GPIO_MERRIFIELD
>         help
>           Say Y here to support Intel Merrifield GPIO.
>
> +config GPIO_MLXBF
> +       tristate "Mellanox BlueField SoC GPIO"
> +       depends on (MELLANOX_PLATFORM && ARM64 && ACPI) || COMPILE_TEST
> +       help
> +         Say Y here if you want GPIO support on Mellanox BlueField SoC.
> +
>  config GPIO_ML_IOH
>         tristate "OKI SEMICONDUCTOR ML7213 IOH GPIO support"
>         depends on X86 || COMPILE_TEST
> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/Makefile b/drivers/gpio/Makefile
> index 37628f8..8d54279 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpio/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/Makefile
> @@ -83,6 +83,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_GPIO_MENZ127)    += gpio-menz127.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_GPIO_MERRIFIELD)  += gpio-merrifield.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_GPIO_MC33880)     += gpio-mc33880.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_GPIO_MC9S08DZ60)  += gpio-mc9s08dz60.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_GPIO_MLXBF)       += gpio-mlxbf.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_GPIO_ML_IOH)      += gpio-ml-ioh.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_GPIO_MM_LANTIQ)   += gpio-mm-lantiq.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_GPIO_MOCKUP)      += gpio-mockup.o
> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-mlxbf.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-mlxbf.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..c0f21f4
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-mlxbf.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,222 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +
> +#include <linux/acpi.h>
> +#include <linux/bitops.h>
> +#include <linux/device.h>
> +#include <linux/gpio/driver.h>
> +#include <linux/io.h>
> +#include <linux/ioport.h>
> +#include <linux/kernel.h>
> +#include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/platform_device.h>
> +#include <linux/pm.h>
> +#include <linux/resource.h>
> +#include <linux/spinlock.h>
> +#include <linux/types.h>
> +#include <linux/version.h>
> +
> +/* Number of pins on BlueField */
> +#define MLXBF_GPIO_NR 54
> +
> +/* Pad Electrical Controls. */
> +#define MLXBF_GPIO_PAD_CONTROL__FIRST_WORD 0x0700
> +#define MLXBF_GPIO_PAD_CONTROL_1__FIRST_WORD 0x0708
> +#define MLXBF_GPIO_PAD_CONTROL_2__FIRST_WORD 0x0710
> +#define MLXBF_GPIO_PAD_CONTROL_3__FIRST_WORD 0x0718
> +

Why the double underscores? Maybe let's make it
MLXBF_GPIO_PADCTRL_FIRST_WORD and so on.

> +#define MLXBF_GPIO_PIN_DIR_I 0x1040
> +#define MLXBF_GPIO_PIN_DIR_O 0x1048
> +#define MLXBF_GPIO_PIN_STATE 0x1000
> +#define MLXBF_GPIO_SCRATCHPAD 0x20
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PM
> +struct mlxbf_gpio_context_save_regs {
> +       u64 scratchpad;
> +       u64 pad_control[MLXBF_GPIO_NR];
> +       u64 pin_dir_i;
> +       u64 pin_dir_o;
> +};
> +#endif
> +
> +/* Device state structure. */
> +struct mlxbf_gpio_state {
> +       struct gpio_chip gc;
> +
> +       /* Must hold this lock to modify shared data. */
> +       spinlock_t lock;
> +
> +       /* Memory Address */
> +       void __iomem *dc_base;
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PM
> +       struct mlxbf_gpio_context_save_regs csave_regs;
> +#endif
> +};
> +
> +static int mlxbf_gpio_set_input(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int offset)
> +{
> +       struct mlxbf_gpio_state *gs = gpiochip_get_data(chip);
> +       u64 in;
> +       u64 out;
> +
> +       out = readq(gs->dc_base + MLXBF_GPIO_PIN_DIR_O);
> +       in = readq(gs->dc_base + MLXBF_GPIO_PIN_DIR_I);
> +

Please protect the entire read/modify operations. Same below. What if
someone was writing to the registers while we're reading them here?

> +       spin_lock(&gs->lock);
> +       writeq(out & ~BIT(offset), gs->dc_base + MLXBF_GPIO_PIN_DIR_O);
> +       writeq(in | BIT(offset), gs->dc_base + MLXBF_GPIO_PIN_DIR_I);
> +       spin_unlock(&gs->lock);
> +
> +       return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int mlxbf_gpio_set_output(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int offset,
> +                                int value)
> +{
> +       struct mlxbf_gpio_state *gs = gpiochip_get_data(chip);
> +       u64 in;
> +       u64 out;
> +
> +       out = readq(gs->dc_base + MLXBF_GPIO_PIN_DIR_O);
> +       in = readq(gs->dc_base + MLXBF_GPIO_PIN_DIR_I);
> +
> +       spin_lock(&gs->lock);
> +       writeq(out | BIT(offset), gs->dc_base + MLXBF_GPIO_PIN_DIR_O);
> +       writeq(in & ~BIT(offset), gs->dc_base + MLXBF_GPIO_PIN_DIR_I);
> +       spin_unlock(&gs->lock);
> +
> +       return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int mlxbf_gpio_get(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int offset)
> +{
> +       u64 value;
> +       struct mlxbf_gpio_state *gs = gpiochip_get_data(chip);
> +
> +       spin_lock(&gs->lock);
> +       value = readq(gs->dc_base + MLXBF_GPIO_PIN_STATE);
> +       spin_unlock(&gs->lock);
> +
> +       return (value >> offset) & 1;
> +}
> +
> +static void mlxbf_gpio_set(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int offset,
> +                          int value)
> +{
> +       u64 data;
> +       struct mlxbf_gpio_state *gs = gpiochip_get_data(chip);
> +
> +       spin_lock(&gs->lock);
> +       data = readq(gs->dc_base + MLXBF_GPIO_PIN_STATE);
> +
> +       if (value)
> +               data |= BIT(offset);
> +       else
> +               data &= ~BIT(offset);
> +       writeq(data, gs->dc_base + MLXBF_GPIO_PIN_STATE);
> +       spin_unlock(&gs->lock);
> +}
> +
> +static int mlxbf_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> +       struct mlxbf_gpio_state *gs;
> +       struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> +       struct gpio_chip *gc;
> +       struct resource *dc_res;

This is a minor nit: why do you use the dc_ prefix? Maybe let's use
more standard names for these variables like "base", "res" etc.? If
there is a valid reason - feel free to ignore it.

> +       int ret;
> +
> +       gs = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*gs), GFP_KERNEL);
> +       if (!gs)
> +               return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +       dc_res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
> +       gs->dc_base = devm_ioremap_resource(&pdev->dev, dc_res);
> +       if (IS_ERR(gs->dc_base))
> +               return PTR_ERR(gs->dc_base);
> +
> +       gc = &gs->gc;
> +       gc->direction_input = mlxbf_gpio_set_input;
> +       gc->direction_output = mlxbf_gpio_set_output;
> +       gc->get = mlxbf_gpio_get;
> +       gc->set = mlxbf_gpio_set;
> +       gc->label = dev_name(dev);
> +       gc->parent = &pdev->dev;
> +       gc->owner = THIS_MODULE;
> +       gc->base = -1;
> +       gc->ngpio = MLXBF_GPIO_NR;
> +
> +       ret = devm_gpiochip_add_data(dev, &gs->gc, gs);
> +       if (ret) {
> +               dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed adding memory mapped gpiochip\n");
> +               return ret;
> +       }
> +
> +       spin_lock_init(&gs->lock);
> +       platform_set_drvdata(pdev, gs);
> +       dev_info(&pdev->dev, "registered Mellanox BlueField GPIO");
> +       return 0;
> +}
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PM
> +static int mlxbf_gpio_suspend(struct platform_device *pdev, pm_message_t state)
> +{
> +       struct mlxbf_gpio_state *gs = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> +
> +       gs->csave_regs.scratchpad = readq(gs->dc_base + MLXBF_GPIO_SCRATCHPAD);
> +       gs->csave_regs.pad_control[0] =
> +               readq(gs->dc_base + MLXBF_GPIO_PAD_CONTROL__FIRST_WORD);
> +       gs->csave_regs.pad_control[1] =
> +               readq(gs->dc_base + MLXBF_GPIO_PAD_CONTROL_1__FIRST_WORD);
> +       gs->csave_regs.pad_control[2] =
> +               readq(gs->dc_base + MLXBF_GPIO_PAD_CONTROL_2__FIRST_WORD);
> +       gs->csave_regs.pad_control[3] =
> +               readq(gs->dc_base + MLXBF_GPIO_PAD_CONTROL_3__FIRST_WORD);
> +       gs->csave_regs.pin_dir_i = readq(gs->dc_base + MLXBF_GPIO_PIN_DIR_I);
> +       gs->csave_regs.pin_dir_o = readq(gs->dc_base + MLXBF_GPIO_PIN_DIR_O);
> +
> +       return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int mlxbf_gpio_resume(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> +       struct mlxbf_gpio_state *gs = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> +
> +       writeq(gs->csave_regs.scratchpad, gs->dc_base + MLXBF_GPIO_SCRATCHPAD);
> +       writeq(gs->csave_regs.pad_control[0],
> +              gs->dc_base + MLXBF_GPIO_PAD_CONTROL__FIRST_WORD);
> +       writeq(gs->csave_regs.pad_control[1],
> +              gs->dc_base + MLXBF_GPIO_PAD_CONTROL_1__FIRST_WORD);
> +       writeq(gs->csave_regs.pad_control[2],
> +              gs->dc_base + MLXBF_GPIO_PAD_CONTROL_2__FIRST_WORD);
> +       writeq(gs->csave_regs.pad_control[3],
> +              gs->dc_base + MLXBF_GPIO_PAD_CONTROL_3__FIRST_WORD);
> +       writeq(gs->csave_regs.pin_dir_i, gs->dc_base + MLXBF_GPIO_PIN_DIR_I);
> +       writeq(gs->csave_regs.pin_dir_o, gs->dc_base + MLXBF_GPIO_PIN_DIR_O);
> +
> +       return 0;
> +}
> +#endif
> +
> +static const struct acpi_device_id mlxbf_gpio_acpi_match[] = {
> +       { "MLNXBF02", 0 },
> +       {}
> +};
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, mlxbf_gpio_acpi_match);
> +
> +static struct platform_driver mlxbf_gpio_driver = {
> +       .driver = {
> +               .name = "mlxbf_gpio",
> +               .acpi_match_table = ACPI_PTR(mlxbf_gpio_acpi_match),
> +       },
> +       .probe    = mlxbf_gpio_probe,
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PM
> +       .suspend  = mlxbf_gpio_suspend,
> +       .resume   = mlxbf_gpio_resume,
> +#endif
> +};
> +
> +module_platform_driver(mlxbf_gpio_driver);
> +
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Mellanox BlueField GPIO Driver");
> +MODULE_AUTHOR("Mellanox Technologies");
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> --
> 2.1.2
>

Best regards,
Bartosz Golaszewski