Re: [PATCH v4] usb: typec: intel_pmc_mux: Expose IOM port status to debugfs

[Rajat Khandelwal]

Hi,

On 5/22/2023 1:07 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 12:33:43PM +0530, Rajat Khandelwal wrote:
> > IOM status has a crucial role during debugging to check the
> > current state of the type-C port.
> > There are ways to fetch the status, but all those require the
> > IOM port status offset, which could change with platform.
> >
> > Make a debugfs directory for intel_pmc_mux and expose the status
> > under it per port basis.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Rajat Khandelwal <rajat.khandelwal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Reviewed-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >
> > v4:
> > 1. Maintain a root directory for PMC module and incorporate devices
> > under it
> > 2. Add the debugfs module under '/sys/kernel/debug/usb'
> > 3. Use the platform device 'pmc->dev' to assign the device's name
> >
> > v3: Allocate the debugfs directory name for the platform device with
> > its ACPI dev name included
> >
> > v2:
> > 1. Remove static declaration of the debugfs root for 'intel_pmc_mux'
> > 2. Remove explicitly defined one-liner functions
> >
> >   drivers/usb/typec/mux/intel_pmc_mux.c | 54 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> >   1 file changed, 53 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/usb/typec/mux/intel_pmc_mux.c b/drivers/usb/typec/mux/intel_pmc_mux.c
> > index 34e4188a40ff..f400094c76f2 100644
> > --- a/drivers/usb/typec/mux/intel_pmc_mux.c
> > +++ b/drivers/usb/typec/mux/intel_pmc_mux.c
> > @@ -15,6 +15,8 @@
> >   #include <linux/usb/typec_mux.h>
> >   #include <linux/usb/typec_dp.h>
> >   #include <linux/usb/typec_tbt.h>
> > +#include <linux/debugfs.h>
> > +#include <linux/usb.h>
> >   
> >   #include <asm/intel_scu_ipc.h>
> >   
> > @@ -143,8 +145,14 @@ struct pmc_usb {
> >   	struct acpi_device *iom_adev;
> >   	void __iomem *iom_base;
> >   	u32 iom_port_status_offset;
> > +
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_FS
> > +	struct dentry *dentry;
> > +#endif
> No need for the #ifdef anymore, right?  In fact, I think it will break
> the build if you have it this way and CONFIG_DEBUG_FS is not enabled,
> right?

I guess you're right. Maybe it'd have been fine if the rest of the
debugfs stuff was also enclosed within the conditional macros.

Anyways, removing it seems appropriate now.

Also, is it OK to send you v5 on the public list directly?

Thanks
Rajat

> thanks,
>
> greg k-h