Message ID | 1302792592-17484-2-git-send-email-lee.jones@linaro.org |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
Hi Lee, On Thursday 14 April 2011, Lee Jones wrote: > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> > --- This definitely needs a changelog, explaining what the code is there for, and why you chose this interface and not the alternatives we discussed earlier. > diff --git a/drivers/base/soc.c b/drivers/base/soc.c > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000..5e4d6ef > --- /dev/null > +++ b/drivers/base/soc.c > @@ -0,0 +1,127 @@ > +/* > + * Copyright (C) ST-Ericsson SA 2011 > + * > + * Author: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> for ST-Ericsson. > + * License terms: GNU General Public License (GPL), version 2 > + */ (I believe this would be Copyright Linaro Ltd, not ST-Ericsson SA, but better ask internally in ST-Ericsson about what your rules are) > +struct device *parent_soc; > +struct device *soc[MAX_SOCS]; The array should not be needed here, you can simply iterate all soc devices using device_for_each_child() if required. Global variables should really not have such generic names. Better make all variables static and make sure that the code using them can at there properly. > +int __init soc_device_register(struct device_attribute *soc_attrs[], > + int soc_count) This needs to return the soc device, otherwise there is nothing that a platform can do with the device. Passing the soc_count the way you do won't work when you have different SoCs, so better require the user to call the register function repeatedly. I think a nicer interface would be to pass a data structure into it with the data you always want to export, and then have the soc core create the necessary attributes, instead of requiring every user to duplicate that code. A possible interface might be struct soc_device { const char *machine; const char *family; /* ... */ struct device dev; }; struct soc_device *soc_device_register(const char *machine, const char *family); For the nonstandard attributes, I would recommend having the individual drivers call device_create_file, in order to discourage the use of device specific attribute names. > diff --git a/include/linux/sys_soc.h b/include/linux/sys_soc.h > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000..988cf6f > --- /dev/null > +++ b/include/linux/sys_soc.h > @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@ > +/* > + * Copyright (C) ST-Ericsson SA 2011 > + * Author: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> for ST-Ericsson. > + * License terms: GNU General Public License (GPL), version 2 > + */ > +#ifndef __SYS_SOC_H > +#define __SYS_SOC_H > + > +#include <linux/kobject.h> > +#include <linux/device.h> > + > +#define MAX_SOCS 8 No need to hardcode the maximum. Arnd
Hi Arnd, > On Thursday 14 April 2011, Lee Jones wrote: >> Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> >> --- > > This definitely needs a changelog, explaining what the code is there for, > and why you chose this interface and not the alternatives we discussed > earlier. No problem. >> diff --git a/drivers/base/soc.c b/drivers/base/soc.c >> new file mode 100644 >> index 0000000..5e4d6ef >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/drivers/base/soc.c >> @@ -0,0 +1,127 @@ >> +/* >> + * Copyright (C) ST-Ericsson SA 2011 >> + * >> + * Author: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> for ST-Ericsson. >> + * License terms: GNU General Public License (GPL), version 2 >> + */ > > (I believe this would be Copyright Linaro Ltd, not ST-Ericsson SA, > but better ask internally in ST-Ericsson about what your rules are) We've had internal discussions about this. I believe this is the correct thing to do. The Copyright should stay with ST-Ericsson. >> +struct device *parent_soc; >> +struct device *soc[MAX_SOCS]; > > The array should not be needed here, you can simply iterate all soc > devices using device_for_each_child() if required. Joy, another re-write. (I think you are correct however) > Global variables should really not have such generic names. Better > make all variables static and make sure that the code using them > can at there properly. Agreed. >> +int __init soc_device_register(struct device_attribute *soc_attrs[], >> + int soc_count) > > This needs to return the soc device, otherwise there is nothing that > a platform can do with the device. What do you think the platform would want to do with the device? > Passing the soc_count the way you do won't work when you have different > SoCs, Why won't the platform know how many SoCs are on a given platform? > so better require the user to call the register function repeatedly. ... and if it truly doesn't know, how will it know how many times to call the register function? > I think a nicer interface would be to pass a data structure into it > with the data you always want to export, and then have the soc > core create the necessary attributes, instead of requiring every > user to duplicate that code. > > A possible interface might be > > struct soc_device { > const char *machine; > const char *family; > /* ... */ > struct device dev; > }; Either way, the probing functions would have to be called in order to populate the structure. Why is using the struct device_attribute show|store callbacks to call them a bad thing to do in this case? > struct soc_device *soc_device_register(const char *machine, const char *family); > > For the nonstandard attributes, I would recommend having the individual > drivers call device_create_file, in order to discourage the use of > device specific attribute names. I'm not entirely sure what you mean here. I'm assuming you mean calling device_create_file from platform code once the device has been registered and a pointer passed back. If that's the case then surely the driver could set the attribute names to _any_ value still? I really like the: struct device_attribute soc_one_attrs[] = { __ATTR(machine, S_IRUGO, ux500_get_machine, NULL), __ATTR(family, S_IRUGO, ux500_get_family, NULL), __ATTR(soc_id, S_IRUGO, ux500_get_soc_id, NULL), /* ... */ __ATTR_NULL, }; ... interface. I think it's neat, and easy to read. Are you suggesting I should remove this altogether and replace it with passing const arguments for common attributes and insisting the platform code calls device_create_file for all non-standard ones? If so, if you would be kind enough to explain why this is better, I'd appreciate it. >> diff --git a/include/linux/sys_soc.h b/include/linux/sys_soc.h >> new file mode 100644 >> index 0000000..988cf6f >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/include/linux/sys_soc.h >> @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@ >> +/* >> + * Copyright (C) ST-Ericsson SA 2011 >> + * Author: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> for ST-Ericsson. >> + * License terms: GNU General Public License (GPL), version 2 >> + */ >> +#ifndef __SYS_SOC_H >> +#define __SYS_SOC_H >> + >> +#include <linux/kobject.h> >> +#include <linux/device.h> >> + >> +#define MAX_SOCS 8 > > No need to hardcode the maximum. No problem. Kind regards, Lee
On Thursday 21 April 2011, Lee Jones wrote: > >> diff --git a/drivers/base/soc.c b/drivers/base/soc.c > >> new file mode 100644 > >> index 0000000..5e4d6ef > >> --- /dev/null > >> +++ b/drivers/base/soc.c > >> @@ -0,0 +1,127 @@ > >> +/* > >> + * Copyright (C) ST-Ericsson SA 2011 > >> + * > >> + * Author: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> for ST-Ericsson. > >> + * License terms: GNU General Public License (GPL), version 2 > >> + */ > > > > (I believe this would be Copyright Linaro Ltd, not ST-Ericsson SA, > > but better ask internally in ST-Ericsson about what your rules are) > > We've had internal discussions about this. I believe this is the correct > thing to do. The Copyright should stay with ST-Ericsson. Ok, in that case, I'd suggest you use your ST-Ericsson address for Signed-off-by and the author statement above. > >> +int __init soc_device_register(struct device_attribute *soc_attrs[], > >> + int soc_count) > > > > This needs to return the soc device, otherwise there is nothing that > > a platform can do with the device. > > What do you think the platform would want to do with the device? Add the child devices, or add more attributes. > > Passing the soc_count the way you do won't work when you have different > > SoCs, > > Why won't the platform know how many SoCs are on a given platform? > > > so better require the user to call the register function repeatedly. > > ... and if it truly doesn't know, how will it know how many times to > call the register function? You could have a platform that has several SOCs, some of which are optional, E.g. one SoC for that contains the main CPU, and then another SOC of a different vendor plugged into an external bus. > > I think a nicer interface would be to pass a data structure into it > > with the data you always want to export, and then have the soc > > core create the necessary attributes, instead of requiring every > > user to duplicate that code. > > > > A possible interface might be > > > > struct soc_device { > > const char *machine; > > const char *family; > > /* ... */ > > struct device dev; > > }; > > Either way, the probing functions would have to be called in order to > populate the structure. Why is using the struct device_attribute > show|store callbacks to call them a bad thing to do in this case? Code is more complex than data, and we want to have the complexity in a central location, not copied over all subarchitectures. When you use a flattened device tree, the strings can simply point to properties of the root device, so there would be very little to do other than assign them. > > struct soc_device *soc_device_register(const char *machine, const char *family); > > > > For the nonstandard attributes, I would recommend having the individual > > drivers call device_create_file, in order to discourage the use of > > device specific attribute names. > > I'm not entirely sure what you mean here. I'm assuming you mean calling > device_create_file from platform code once the device has been > registered and a pointer passed back. Right. > If that's the case then surely the > driver could set the attribute names to _any_ value still? > > I really like the: > > struct device_attribute soc_one_attrs[] = { > __ATTR(machine, S_IRUGO, ux500_get_machine, NULL), > __ATTR(family, S_IRUGO, ux500_get_family, NULL), > __ATTR(soc_id, S_IRUGO, ux500_get_soc_id, NULL), > /* ... */ > __ATTR_NULL, > }; > ... interface. I think it's neat, and easy to read. Are you suggesting I > should remove this altogether and replace it with passing const > arguments for common attributes and insisting the platform code calls > device_create_file for all non-standard ones? If so, if you would be > kind enough to explain why this is better, I'd appreciate it. I would prefer to standardise the attributes as much as possible. Ideally, all SOCs should export the same set of attributes, and in no case should there be multiple SOCs that have the same attribute name but with a slightly different interface (e.g. one writable, or one root-only readable), or the same contents in attributes of different names. The best way to ensure this is to give less flexiblity to the person implementing the individual SOC code. All attributes that are documented to be available across SOCs can simply be automatically created and filled with the data provided by the platform. Having interfaces specific to one SOC should be the absolute exception, so I'd try to make that as hard as possible. Arnd
Hi Arnd, </snip> >>> (I believe this would be Copyright Linaro Ltd, not ST-Ericsson SA, >>> but better ask internally in ST-Ericsson about what your rules are) >> >> We've had internal discussions about this. I believe this is the correct >> thing to do. The Copyright should stay with ST-Ericsson. > > Ok, in that case, I'd suggest you use your ST-Ericsson address for > Signed-off-by and the author statement above. I'm not an ST-Ericsson employee, thus do not have an associated address. I work for Linaro, currently on assignment to ST-Ericsson. </snip> > I would prefer to standardise the attributes as much as possible. Ideally, > all SOCs should export the same set of attributes, and in no case should > there be multiple SOCs that have the same attribute name but with a > slightly different interface (e.g. one writable, or one root-only readable), > or the same contents in attributes of different names. > > The best way to ensure this is to give less flexiblity to the person > implementing the individual SOC code. All attributes that are documented > to be available across SOCs can simply be automatically created and > filled with the data provided by the platform. > > Having interfaces specific to one SOC should be the absolute exception, > so I'd try to make that as hard as possible. Well your word overrides mine. I'll completely rewrite the driver again. It may be some time before it's complete (post-UDS/LDS), as I have a lot on 'till then. I would like to see this to the end though, so leave it with me. Kind regards, Lee
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 12:56:07PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > Hi Arnd, > > </snip> > > >>> (I believe this would be Copyright Linaro Ltd, not ST-Ericsson SA, > >>> but better ask internally in ST-Ericsson about what your rules are) > >> > >> We've had internal discussions about this. I believe this is the correct > >> thing to do. The Copyright should stay with ST-Ericsson. > > > > Ok, in that case, I'd suggest you use your ST-Ericsson address for > > Signed-off-by and the author statement above. > > I'm not an ST-Ericsson employee, thus do not have an associated address. > > I work for Linaro, currently on assignment to ST-Ericsson. It was my understanding gained last week was that Linaro is a separate organization, and that while folk are working for Linaro, stuff they create belongs to Linaro and not the company whose office they happen to be sitting in. I also thought Linaro was supposed to be an organization for solving the _common_ problems being experienced by each member organization, rather than being a contracting house to any one particular organization. Am I mistaken?
Hi Russell, >>> Ok, in that case, I'd suggest you use your ST-Ericsson address for >>> Signed-off-by and the author statement above. >> >> I'm not an ST-Ericsson employee, thus do not have an associated address. >> >> I work for Linaro, currently on assignment to ST-Ericsson. > > It was my understanding gained last week was that Linaro is a separate > organization, and that while folk are working for Linaro, stuff they > create belongs to Linaro and not the company whose office they happen > to be sitting in. > > I also thought Linaro was supposed to be an organization for solving > the _common_ problems being experienced by each member organization, > rather than being a contracting house to any one particular > organization. Am I mistaken? You are not mistaken for the most part. However, you are referring to the engineering work carried out by the engineers contained in the Linaro Working Groups. The role I occupy within the company is slightly different. I lead a group of individuals called a "Landing Team". There are currently four of these within Linaro; ST-Ericsson (mine), Texas Instruments, Samsung and Freescale, with a view on increasing that number over the upcoming months. The Landing Team's main purpose is to upstream as much code as possible for a previously specified SoC, in our case the u8500. How the Landing Team spends their time is my responsibility and as such (unless Linaro or ST-Ericsson management have a special request) is depicted by me. With regards to the Copyright label, I will endeavor to find a definitive answer. We came to the conclusion of "Written by Linaro for ST-Ericsson" some time ago in a Landing Team meeting we held some months ago. If you or Arnd see this as an issue clearly we need to have more meetings and involve more senior people from Linaro to chase a conclusive answer. Thanks for your time and input Russell and Arnd, it is appreciated. Kind regards, Lee Jones Team Lead, Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team
diff --git a/drivers/base/Kconfig b/drivers/base/Kconfig index e9e5238..f381fcc 100644 --- a/drivers/base/Kconfig +++ b/drivers/base/Kconfig @@ -168,6 +168,9 @@ config SYS_HYPERVISOR bool default n +config SYS_SOC + bool + config ARCH_NO_SYSDEV_OPS bool ---help--- diff --git a/drivers/base/Makefile b/drivers/base/Makefile index 4c5701c..a0d246d 100644 --- a/drivers/base/Makefile +++ b/drivers/base/Makefile @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ ifeq ($(CONFIG_SYSFS),y) obj-$(CONFIG_MODULES) += module.o endif obj-$(CONFIG_SYS_HYPERVISOR) += hypervisor.o +obj-$(CONFIG_SYS_SOC) += soc.o ccflags-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_DRIVER) := -DDEBUG diff --git a/drivers/base/soc.c b/drivers/base/soc.c new file mode 100644 index 0000000..5e4d6ef --- /dev/null +++ b/drivers/base/soc.c @@ -0,0 +1,127 @@ +/* + * Copyright (C) ST-Ericsson SA 2011 + * + * Author: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> for ST-Ericsson. + * License terms: GNU General Public License (GPL), version 2 + */ + +#include <linux/sysfs.h> +#include <linux/module.h> +#include <linux/init.h> +#include <linux/stat.h> +#include <linux/slab.h> +#include <linux/sys_soc.h> + +struct device *parent_soc; +struct device *soc[MAX_SOCS]; + +static void soc_device_remove_files(struct device *soc, + struct device_attribute soc_attrs[]) +{ + int i = 0; + + while (soc_attrs[i++].attr.name != NULL) + device_remove_file(soc, &soc_attrs[i]); +} + +static int __init soc_device_create_files(struct device *soc, + struct device_attribute soc_attrs[]) +{ + int ret = 0; + int i = 0; + + while (soc_attrs[i].attr.name != NULL) { + ret = device_create_file(soc, &soc_attrs[i++]); + if (ret) + goto out; + } + return ret; + +out: + soc_device_remove_files(soc, soc_attrs); + return ret; +} + +void soc_device_release(struct device *soc) +{ + kfree(soc); +} + +int __init soc_device_register(struct device_attribute *soc_attrs[], + int soc_count) +{ + int ret, i; + + if (!soc_attrs || soc_count > MAX_SOCS) + return -EINVAL; + + /* Register top-level SoC device '/sys/devices/soc'. */ + parent_soc = kzalloc(sizeof(struct device), GFP_KERNEL); + if (!parent_soc) + return -ENOMEM; + + ret = dev_set_name(parent_soc, "soc"); + if (ret) + goto soc_parent_free; + + parent_soc->release = soc_device_release; + + ret = device_register(parent_soc); + if (ret) + goto soc_parent_free; + + /* Register each SoC and populate sysfs with requested attributes. */ + for (i = 0; i < soc_count - 1; i++) { + soc[i] = kzalloc(sizeof(struct device), GFP_KERNEL); + if (!soc[i]) { + ret = -ENOMEM; + goto soc_out_of_memory; + } + + ret = dev_set_name(soc[i], "soc%d", i); + if (ret) + goto soc_free_unreg; + + soc[i]->parent = parent_soc; + soc[i]->release = soc_device_release; + + ret = device_register(soc[i]); + if (ret) + goto soc_free_unreg; + + ret = soc_device_create_files(soc[i], soc_attrs[i]); + if (ret) + goto soc_free_unreg; + } + return ret; + +soc_free_unreg: + kfree(soc[i]); +soc_out_of_memory: + /* Unregister only previously registered SoCs. */ + soc_device_unregister(soc_attrs, i); + return ret; + +soc_parent_free: + /* Free unregisterable parent SoC device. */ + kfree(parent_soc); + return ret; +} + +void soc_device_unregister(struct device_attribute *soc_attrs[], + int soc_count) +{ + int i; + + if (!soc_attrs || soc_count > MAX_SOCS) + return; + + /* Unregister and free all SoC from sysfs. */ + for (i = 0; i < soc_count - 1; i++) { + soc_device_remove_files(soc[i], soc_attrs[i]); + device_unregister(soc[i]); + } + + /* Unregister top-level SoC device '/sys/devices/soc'. */ + device_unregister(parent_soc); +} diff --git a/include/linux/sys_soc.h b/include/linux/sys_soc.h new file mode 100644 index 0000000..988cf6f --- /dev/null +++ b/include/linux/sys_soc.h @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@ +/* + * Copyright (C) ST-Ericsson SA 2011 + * Author: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> for ST-Ericsson. + * License terms: GNU General Public License (GPL), version 2 + */ +#ifndef __SYS_SOC_H +#define __SYS_SOC_H + +#include <linux/kobject.h> +#include <linux/device.h> + +#define MAX_SOCS 8 + +/** + * soc_device_register - register SoC as a device + * @soc_attrs: Multiple arrays of sysfs file attributes + * @num_socs: Amount of SoCs we're attempting to register + */ +int soc_device_register(struct device_attribute *soc_attrs[], + int num_socs); +/** + * soc_device_unregister - unregister SoC as a device + * @soc_attrs: Multiple arrays of sysfs file attributes + * @num_socs: Amount of SoCs we're attempting to register + */ +void soc_device_unregister(struct device_attribute *soc_attrs[], + int num_socs); + +#endif /* __SYS_SOC_H */
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> --- drivers/base/Kconfig | 3 + drivers/base/Makefile | 1 + drivers/base/soc.c | 127 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ include/linux/sys_soc.h | 29 +++++++++++ 4 files changed, 160 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) create mode 100644 drivers/base/soc.c create mode 100644 include/linux/sys_soc.h