Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20201016222523.364218-1-evgreen@chromium.org> <20201016152454.v3.2.Idef164c23d326f5e5edecfc5d3eb2a68fcf18be1@changeid>
 <CAHp75VfsM+ysz_tr_h0rJpspcZAToiV+H5KDCi7J=LCEO0sFxQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAE=gft5cd4v=THHuBPAeB5ApgH+TAPiEukZiG0pC33RsZ4AriQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAE=gft5cd4v=THHuBPAeB5ApgH+TAPiEukZiG0pC33RsZ4AriQ@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Evan Green <evgreen@chromium.org>
Date:   Tue, 27 Oct 2020 16:00:37 -0700
Message-ID: <CAE=gft4hrvHm=ofmF_-hc3UQczqV_GSDQ9hL906bKW4WfbWHSg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] i2c: i2c-mux-gpio: Enable this driver in ACPI land
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Cc:     Peter Rosin <peda@axentia.se>, Wolfram Sang <wsa@kernel.org>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
        Peter Korsgaard <peter.korsgaard@barco.com>,
        linux-i2c <linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 9:53 AM Evan Green <evgreen@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 11:58 AM Andy Shevchenko
> <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 8:30 AM Evan Green <evgreen@chromium.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Enable i2c-mux-gpio devices to be defined via ACPI. The idle-state
> > > property translates directly to a fwnode_property_*() call. The child
> > > reg property translates naturally into _ADR in ACPI.
> > >
> > > The i2c-parent binding is a relic from the days when the bindings
> > > dictated that all direct children of an I2C controller had to be I2C
> > > devices. These days that's no longer required. The i2c-mux can sit as a
> > > direct child of its parent controller, which is where it makes the most
> > > sense from a hardware description perspective. For the ACPI
> > > implementation we'll assume that's always how the i2c-mux-gpio is
> > > instantiated.
> >
> > Can you tell me if the following is relevant to what you are looking for?
> > https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/drivers/i2c/i2c-mux.c#L393
>
> I don't think so, but let me know if I'm reading between the lines incorrectly.
>
> The code you pointed to links the newly-minted fake i2c controller
> back together with its ACPI node. This is important, since I think
> that's how child I2C devices underneath the fake busses get populated
> in ACPI land. But the paragraph above is discussing how to identify
> the parent adapter (ie the real hardware) for an i2c-mux-gpio device.
>
> In DT-land, the i2c-mux-gpio floats at the top of the tree directly
> under /, and then uses a phandle to point to where transactions should
> be forwarded. I'm told the reason for this is historical limitations
> with the DT bindings. Rather than trying to translate the phandle over
> 1:1 into ACPI-land, I'm asserting that the mux device should live
> underneath the adapter it wants to forward traffic to.

Andy or Peter, Any other thoughts on this series?
-Evan