Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-37363-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Precedence: bulk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2024 17:55:42 +0100
Message-Id: <CYN3EW3ROWDF.2EXS5GSV1K8PH@bootlin.com>
To: "Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>, "Gregory
 CLEMENT" <gregory.clement@bootlin.com>, "Michael Turquette"
 <mturquette@baylibre.com>, "Stephen Boyd" <sboyd@kernel.org>, "Rob Herring"
 <robh+dt@kernel.org>, "Krzysztof Kozlowski"
 <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>, "Conor Dooley" <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
 "Thomas Bogendoerfer" <tsbogend@alpha.franken.de>, "Linus Walleij"
 <linus.walleij@linaro.org>, =?utf-8?q?Rafa=C5=82_Mi=C5=82ecki?=
 <rafal@milecki.pl>, "Philipp Zabel" <p.zabel@pengutronix.de>
From: =?utf-8?q?Th=C3=A9o_Lebrun?= <theo.lebrun@bootlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 10/17] pinctrl: eyeq5: add platform driver
Cc: "Vladimir Kondratiev" <vladimir.kondratiev@mobileye.com>,
 <linux-mips@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-clk@vger.kernel.org>,
 <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "Thomas
 Petazzoni" <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>, "Tawfik Bayouk"
 <tawfik.bayouk@mobileye.com>, <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20240123-mbly-clk-v3-0-392b010b8281@bootlin.com>
 <20240123-mbly-clk-v3-10-392b010b8281@bootlin.com>
 <5e06d14a-baa7-4e18-a731-6621e623565f@linaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <5e06d14a-baa7-4e18-a731-6621e623565f@linaro.org>

Hello,

On Wed Jan 24, 2024 at 8:03 AM CET, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 23/01/2024 19:46, Th=C3=A9o Lebrun wrote:
> > Add the Mobileye EyeQ5 pin controller driver. It might grow to add late=
r
> > support of other platforms from Mobileye. It belongs to a syscon region
> > called OLB.
> >=20
> > Existing pins and their function live statically in the driver code
> > rather than in the devicetree, see compatible match data.
> >=20
>
> ...
>
> > +static int eq5p_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > +{
> > +	struct device *dev =3D &pdev->dev;
> > +	struct device_node *np =3D dev->of_node;
> > +	struct device_node *parent_np =3D of_get_parent(np);
> > +	const struct eq5p_match *match =3D of_device_get_match_data(dev);
> > +	struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev;
> > +	struct eq5p_pinctrl *pctrl;
> > +	int ret;
> > +
> > +	pctrl =3D devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*pctrl), GFP_KERNEL);
> > +	if (!pctrl)
> > +		return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > +	pctrl->olb =3D ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
> > +	if (parent_np)
> > +		pctrl->olb =3D syscon_node_to_regmap(parent_np);
> > +	if (IS_ERR(pctrl->olb))
> > +		pctrl->olb =3D syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle(np, "mobileye,olb");
> > +	if (IS_ERR(pctrl->olb))
> > +		return PTR_ERR(pctrl->olb);
>
> No, we talked about this, you got comments on this. There is no
> mobileye,olb. You cannot have undocumented properties.

Clearly and I fully agree. It's a versioning issue on my side. It's
been fixed (again, oops).

>
> > +
> > +	pctrl->regs =3D match->regs;
> > +	pctrl->funcs =3D match->funcs;
> > +	pctrl->nfuncs =3D match->nfuncs;
> > +
> > +	pctrl->desc.name =3D dev_name(dev);
> > +	pctrl->desc.pins =3D match->pins;
> > +	pctrl->desc.npins =3D match->npins;
> > +	pctrl->desc.pctlops =3D &eq5p_pinctrl_ops;
> > +	pctrl->desc.pmxops =3D &eq5p_pinmux_ops;
> > +	pctrl->desc.confops =3D &eq5p_pinconf_ops;
> > +	pctrl->desc.owner =3D THIS_MODULE;
> > +
> > +	ret =3D devm_pinctrl_register_and_init(dev, &pctrl->desc, pctrl, &pct=
ldev);
> > +	if (ret) {
> > +		dev_err(dev, "Failed registering pinctrl device: %d\n", ret);
> > +		return ret;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	ret =3D pinctrl_enable(pctldev);
> > +	if (ret) {
> > +		dev_err(dev, "Failed enabling pinctrl device: %d\n", ret);
> > +		return ret;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	dev_info(dev, "probed\n");
>
> I am pretty sure you got comments for these. Drop such debugs from all
> of your code. Current and future.

Same thing, it must have been lost in the same fixup patch as the
previous mistake.

[...]

> > +static struct platform_driver eq5p_driver =3D {
> > +	.driver =3D {
> > +		.name =3D "eyeq5-pinctrl",
> > +		.of_match_table =3D eq5p_match,
> > +	},
> > +	.probe =3D eq5p_probe,
> > +};
> > +
> > +static int __init eq5p_init(void)
> > +{
> > +	return platform_driver_register(&eq5p_driver);
> > +}
> > +core_initcall(eq5p_init);
>
> No, pins are not a core_initcall. This could be arch_initcall, but
> considering you depend on the parent this must be module driver.
>
> Even from this dependency point of view your initcalls are totally wrong
> and will lead to issues.

Same as reset: moved to using the builtin_platform_driver() macro. No
need for it to be module as it cannot be one.

Thanks,

--
Th=C3=A9o Lebrun, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com