This adds device tree support for rfkill-gpio. The optional platform
paramters gpio_runtime_close and gpio_runtime_setup are not implemented.
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: "John W. Linville" <[email protected]>
Cc: Johannes Berg <[email protected]>
Cc: Rhyland Klein <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Marc Dietrich <[email protected]>
---
include/linux/rfkill-gpio.h | 2 +-
net/rfkill/rfkill-gpio.c | 57 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 58 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/rfkill-gpio.h b/include/linux/rfkill-gpio.h
index 4d09f6e..76a9674 100644
--- a/include/linux/rfkill-gpio.h
+++ b/include/linux/rfkill-gpio.h
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@
*/
struct rfkill_gpio_platform_data {
- char *name;
+ const char *name;
int reset_gpio;
int shutdown_gpio;
const char *power_clk_name;
diff --git a/net/rfkill/rfkill-gpio.c b/net/rfkill/rfkill-gpio.c
index 865adb6..4db343d 100644
--- a/net/rfkill/rfkill-gpio.c
+++ b/net/rfkill/rfkill-gpio.c
@@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
#include <linux/kernel.h>
#include <linux/module.h>
#include <linux/rfkill.h>
+#include <linux/of_gpio.h>
#include <linux/platform_device.h>
#include <linux/clk.h>
#include <linux/slab.h>
@@ -77,13 +78,68 @@ static const struct rfkill_ops rfkill_gpio_ops = {
.set_block = rfkill_gpio_set_power,
};
+#ifdef CONFIG_OF
+static struct rfkill_gpio_platform_data * __devinit
+ rfkill_gpio_parse_pdata(struct platform_device *pdev)
+{
+ struct rfkill_gpio_platform_data *pdata, *rfkill;
+ struct device_node *np = pdev->dev.of_node, *child;
+ int count = 0;
+
+ for_each_child_of_node(np, child)
+ count++;
+ if (!count)
+ return NULL;
+
+ pdata = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev,
+ sizeof(struct rfkill_gpio_platform_data) *
+ count, GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!pdata)
+ return NULL;
+
+ rfkill = pdata;
+
+ for_each_child_of_node(np, child) {
+ of_property_read_string(child, "label", &rfkill->name);
+ if (!rfkill->name)
+ rfkill->name = child->name;
+ rfkill->reset_gpio = of_get_named_gpio(child, "reset-gpio", 0);
+ rfkill->shutdown_gpio = of_get_named_gpio(child,
+ "shutdown-gpio", 0);
+ of_property_read_u32(child, "type", &rfkill->type);
+ of_property_read_string(child, "clock",
+ &rfkill->power_clk_name);
+
+ rfkill += sizeof(struct rfkill_gpio_platform_data);
+ }
+
+ return pdata;
+}
+
+static const struct of_device_id of_rfkill_gpio_match[] = {
+ { .compatible = "rfkill-gpio", },
+ {},
+};
+
+#else
+static inline struct rfkill_gpio_platform_data
+ *rfkill_gpio_parse_pdata(struct platform_device *pdev)
+{
+ return NULL;
+}
+#endif
+
static int rfkill_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
{
struct rfkill_gpio_data *rfkill;
struct rfkill_gpio_platform_data *pdata = pdev->dev.platform_data;
+ struct device_node *np = pdev->dev.of_node;
int ret = 0;
int len = 0;
+ if (np)
+ pdata = rfkill_gpio_parse_pdata(pdev);
+
if (!pdata) {
pr_warn("%s: No platform data specified\n", __func__);
return -EINVAL;
@@ -217,6 +273,7 @@ static struct platform_driver rfkill_gpio_driver = {
.driver = {
.name = "rfkill_gpio",
.owner = THIS_MODULE,
+ .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(of_rfkill_gpio_match),
},
};
--
1.7.5.4
Add device tree bindings information for rfkill gpio switches.
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: "John W. Linville" <[email protected]>
Cc: Johannes Berg <[email protected]>
Cc: Rhyland Klein <[email protected]>
Cc: Grant Likely <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Signed-off-by: Marc Dietrich <[email protected]>
---
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/rfkill.txt | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++
1 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/rfkill.txt
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/rfkill.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/rfkill.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..22bf22a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/rfkill.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+RFKILL switches connected to GPIO lines
+
+Required properties:
+- compatible : should be "rfkill-gpio".
+
+Each rfkill switch is represented as a sub-node of the rfkill-gpio device.
+Each node has a label property which represents the name of the corresponding
+rfkill device.
+
+RFKILL sub-node properties:
+- label : (optional) The label for this rfkill switch. If omitted, the label is
+ taken from the node name (excluding the unit address).
+- reset-gpio, shutdown-gpio : Should specify the rfkill gpios for reset and
+ shutdown (see "Specifying GPIO information for devices" in
+ Documentation/devicetree/booting-without-of.txt).
+- type : enumerated type of the gpio (see include/linux/rfkill.h).
+- clock : (optional) name of the clock name associated with the rfkill switch
+ (see include/linux/rfkill-gpio.h)
+
+Examples:
+
+rfkill-switches {
+ compatible = "rfkill-gpio";
+
+ wifi {
+ label = "wifi";
+ reset-gpio = <&gpio 25 0>; /* Active high */
+ shutdown-gpio = <&gpio 85 0>; /* Active high */
+ type = <1>;
+ };
+
+ bt {
+ label = "bluetooth";
+ reset-gpio = <&gpio 17 0>; /* Active high */
+ shutdown-gpio = <&gpio 35 0>; /* Active high */
+ type = <1>;
+ };
+};
--
1.7.5.4
Hi,
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 5:47 AM, Rob Herring <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 02/12/2012 02:21 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
>> Hi Marc,
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Marc Dietrich <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Add device tree bindings information for rfkill gpio switches.
>>>
>>> Cc: [email protected]
>>> Cc: "John W. Linville" <[email protected]>
>>> Cc: Johannes Berg <[email protected]>
>>> Cc: Rhyland Klein <[email protected]>
>>> Cc: Grant Likely <[email protected]>
>>> Cc: [email protected]
>>> Signed-off-by: Marc Dietrich <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>> ?Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/rfkill.txt | ? 38 +++++++++++++++++++++
>>> ?1 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>> ?create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/rfkill.txt
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/rfkill.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/rfkill.txt
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 0000000..22bf22a
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/rfkill.txt
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
>>> +RFKILL switches connected to GPIO lines
>>> +
>>> +Required properties:
>>> +- compatible : should be "rfkill-gpio".
>>> +
>>> +Each rfkill switch is represented as a sub-node of the rfkill-gpio device.
>>> +Each node has a label property which represents the name of the corresponding
>>> +rfkill device.
>>> +
>>> +RFKILL sub-node properties:
>>> +- label : ?(optional) The label for this rfkill switch. ?If omitted, the label is
>>> + ?taken from the node name (excluding the unit address).
>>> +- reset-gpio, shutdown-gpio : ?Should specify the rfkill gpios for reset and
>>> + ?shutdown (see "Specifying GPIO information for devices" in
>>
>> Should that be reset-gpios, shutdown-gpios? Even though you have only
>> one it seems that people put an 's' on the end.
Agreed.
>>
>>> + ?Documentation/devicetree/booting-without-of.txt).
>>> +- type : enumerated type of the gpio (see include/linux/rfkill.h).
>>
>> It would be better I think if this were explicit here. If you have a
>> number, then what values does it take and what do they mean?
This should most likely be moved to a set of properties instad of an
enumerated type, I agree. And/or use a string to encode the type
simiar to how powerpc does some of the USB interfaces.
>>> +- clock : (optional) name of the clock name associated with the rfkill switch
>>
>> Can this be a phandle instead of a string?
>
> This seems to be in the wrong place altogether. The gpio controller
> would have a clock, not particular gpio line.
And either way, this should conform to the standard clock binding, not
use something locally hacked up.
>>> + ?(see include/linux/rfkill-gpio.h)
>>
>> IMO device tree bindings should be fully documented in this file,
>> rather than needing to look at a separate header. This is particularly
>> true if the binding is used in another project.
>>
>
> Correct. A binding should not be Linux specific. It should describe the h/w.
>
>>> +
>>> +Examples:
>>> +
>>> +rfkill-switches {
>>> + ? ? ? compatible = "rfkill-gpio";
>>> +
>>> + ? ? ? wifi {
>>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? label = "wifi";
>>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? reset-gpio = <&gpio 25 0>; /* Active high */
>>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? shutdown-gpio = <&gpio 85 0>; /* Active high */
>>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? type = <1>;
>>> + ? ? ? };
>>> +
>>> + ? ? ? bt {
>>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? label = "bluetooth";
>>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? reset-gpio = <&gpio 17 0>; /* Active high */
>>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? shutdown-gpio = <&gpio 35 0>; /* Active high */
>>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? type = <1>;
>>> + ? ? ? };
>
> Why wouldn't the gpio lines just be part of the bt and wifi device nodes
> themselves? The DT is supposed to describe h/w connections.
The thing is, that "rfkill" isn't a _device_, and Marc is trying to
describe it as one. It's really just a software abstraction of a
collection of power supplies and/or GPIO lines that are used to power
up/down specific peripherals.
I know that the USB modem, for example, is probed through autoprobing
the USB bus. So there's no device to associate it with, per se. But
the USB slot that the modem is connected to, which is also the
connector that the GPIO controls the power supplies and reset line to,
are connected directly to one of the USB host controllers, right? So
maybe describing it there is a better option.
That still leaves the issue of actually having something to bind it
against. As I already said, rfkill isn't a device, so crafting one
just because linux wants one is the wrong way to go about. Maybe using
/chosen to refer to the device nodes for the GPIO lines under USB
instead, and have rfkill look for those and create a device if they're
found is a better way to go about it.
-Olof
Am 13.02.2012 20:43, schrieb Olof Johansson:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 5:47 AM, Rob Herring<[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 02/12/2012 02:21 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Marc Dietrich<[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Add device tree bindings information for rfkill gpio switches.
>>>>
>>>> Cc: [email protected]
>>>> Cc: "John W. Linville"<[email protected]>
>>>> Cc: Johannes Berg<[email protected]>
>>>> Cc: Rhyland Klein<[email protected]>
>>>> Cc: Grant Likely<[email protected]>
>>>> Cc: [email protected]
>>>> Signed-off-by: Marc Dietrich<[email protected]>
>>>> ---
>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/rfkill.txt | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> 1 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/rfkill.txt
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/rfkill.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/rfkill.txt
>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>> index 0000000..22bf22a
>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/rfkill.txt
>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
>>>> +RFKILL switches connected to GPIO lines
>>>> +
>>>> +Required properties:
>>>> +- compatible : should be "rfkill-gpio".
>>>> +
>>>> +Each rfkill switch is represented as a sub-node of the rfkill-gpio device.
>>>> +Each node has a label property which represents the name of the corresponding
>>>> +rfkill device.
>>>> +
>>>> +RFKILL sub-node properties:
>>>> +- label : (optional) The label for this rfkill switch. If omitted, the label is
>>>> + taken from the node name (excluding the unit address).
>>>> +- reset-gpio, shutdown-gpio : Should specify the rfkill gpios for reset and
>>>> + shutdown (see "Specifying GPIO information for devices" in
>>> Should that be reset-gpios, shutdown-gpios? Even though you have only
>>> one it seems that people put an 's' on the end.
> Agreed.
>
>>>> + Documentation/devicetree/booting-without-of.txt).
>>>> +- type : enumerated type of the gpio (see include/linux/rfkill.h).
>>> It would be better I think if this were explicit here. If you have a
>>> number, then what values does it take and what do they mean?
> This should most likely be moved to a set of properties instad of an
> enumerated type, I agree. And/or use a string to encode the type
> simiar to how powerpc does some of the USB interfaces.
>
>>>> +- clock : (optional) name of the clock name associated with the rfkill switch
>>> Can this be a phandle instead of a string?
>> This seems to be in the wrong place altogether. The gpio controller
>> would have a clock, not particular gpio line.
> And either way, this should conform to the standard clock binding, not
> use something locally hacked up.
>
>>>> + (see include/linux/rfkill-gpio.h)
>>> IMO device tree bindings should be fully documented in this file,
>>> rather than needing to look at a separate header. This is particularly
>>> true if the binding is used in another project.
>>>
>> Correct. A binding should not be Linux specific. It should describe the h/w.
>>
>>>> +
>>>> +Examples:
>>>> +
>>>> +rfkill-switches {
>>>> + compatible = "rfkill-gpio";
>>>> +
>>>> + wifi {
>>>> + label = "wifi";
>>>> + reset-gpio =<&gpio 25 0>; /* Active high */
>>>> + shutdown-gpio =<&gpio 85 0>; /* Active high */
>>>> + type =<1>;
>>>> + };
>>>> +
>>>> + bt {
>>>> + label = "bluetooth";
>>>> + reset-gpio =<&gpio 17 0>; /* Active high */
>>>> + shutdown-gpio =<&gpio 35 0>; /* Active high */
>>>> + type =<1>;
>>>> + };
>> Why wouldn't the gpio lines just be part of the bt and wifi device nodes
>> themselves? The DT is supposed to describe h/w connections.
> The thing is, that "rfkill" isn't a _device_, and Marc is trying to
> describe it as one. It's really just a software abstraction of a
> collection of power supplies and/or GPIO lines that are used to power
> up/down specific peripherals.
Oh, this gets more complicated than I wanted. First I only translated
the *existing* platform_data to devicetree format. I understand that
devicetree needs some more careful thoughts. Let me shortly describe my
hw setup and lets see how it can me mapped.
> I know that the USB modem, for example, is probed through autoprobing
> the USB bus. So there's no device to associate it with, per se. But
> the USB slot that the modem is connected to, which is also the
> connector that the GPIO controls the power supplies and reset line to,
> are connected directly to one of the USB host controllers, right? So
> maybe describing it there is a better option.
The wifi module (some models also include an additional bluetooth part)
is plugged into a mini-pci-e like slot. This has pins for usb (the
module uses usb), dap, sdio, uart, and some other pins which also
include the gpio lines for rfkill. The other gpio end is directly
connected to the tegra soc.
So there is no usb slot and a standard usb slot also does not contain
any gpio lines (just 2 power and 2 data lines). The usb controller also
sits in the tegra soc (well, more or less because it is the ulpi port
connected to SMC3315 and later a SMC2512 4-port usb hub). So gpio and
usb take a totally different path. IMHO, it makes no sense to add a gpio
to the usb controller, but see below.
> That still leaves the issue of actually having something to bind it
> against. As I already said, rfkill isn't a device, so crafting one
> just because linux wants one is the wrong way to go about. Maybe using
> /chosen to refer to the device nodes for the GPIO lines under USB
> instead, and have rfkill look for those and create a device if they're
> found is a better way to go about it.
To me it looks more like how the LEDs are implemented but with a
"linux,rfkill_type" property. To me this looks saner than adding a gpio
to an usb controller, even if there if no physical rfkill device. This
still leaves the problem of what to do with the clock (it is not used by
any machine AFAIK).
The main problem here is that usb devices have no device tree entries
(only the host controllers). Perhaps it is possible to a fake usb device
as a workaround? This has the advantage that it exists physically, but
the resources are not taken from the device tree. Instead all other non
standard properties (gpios, clocks) are.
Marc
Am Montag, 13. Februar 2012, 11:43:17 schrieb Olof Johansson:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 5:47 AM, Rob Herring <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On 02/12/2012 02:21 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
> >> Hi Marc,
> >>
> >> On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Marc Dietrich <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>> Add device tree bindings information for rfkill gpio switches.
> >>>
> >>> Cc: [email protected]
> >>> Cc: "John W. Linville" <[email protected]>
> >>> Cc: Johannes Berg <[email protected]>
> >>> Cc: Rhyland Klein <[email protected]>
> >>> Cc: Grant Likely <[email protected]>
> >>> Cc: [email protected]
> >>> Signed-off-by: Marc Dietrich <[email protected]>
> >>> ---
> >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/rfkill.txt | 38
> >>> +++++++++++++++++++++ 1 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/rfkill.txt
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/rfkill.txt
> >>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/rfkill.txt new file mode 100644
> >>> index 0000000..22bf22a
> >>> --- /dev/null
> >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/rfkill.txt
> >>> @@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
> >>> +RFKILL switches connected to GPIO lines
> >>> +
> >>> +Required properties:
> >>> +- compatible : should be "rfkill-gpio".
> >>> +
> >>> +Each rfkill switch is represented as a sub-node of the rfkill-gpio device.
> >>> +Each node has a label property which represents the name of the
> >>> corresponding
> >>> +rfkill device.
> >>> +
> >>> +RFKILL sub-node properties:
> >>> +- label : (optional) The label for this rfkill switch. If omitted, the
> >>> label is + taken from the node name (excluding the unit address).
> >>> +- reset-gpio, shutdown-gpio : Should specify the rfkill gpios for reset
> >>> and
> >>> + shutdown (see "Specifying GPIO information for devices" in
> >>
> >> Should that be reset-gpios, shutdown-gpios? Even though you have only
> >> one it seems that people put an 's' on the end.
>
> Agreed.
>
> >>> + Documentation/devicetree/booting-without-of.txt).
> >>> +- type : enumerated type of the gpio (see include/linux/rfkill.h).
> >>
> >> It would be better I think if this were explicit here. If you have a
> >> number, then what values does it take and what do they mean?
>
> This should most likely be moved to a set of properties instad of an
> enumerated type, I agree. And/or use a string to encode the type
> simiar to how powerpc does some of the USB interfaces.
>
> >>> +- clock : (optional) name of the clock name associated with the rfkill
> >>> switch
> >>
> >> Can this be a phandle instead of a string?
> >
> > This seems to be in the wrong place altogether. The gpio controller
> > would have a clock, not particular gpio line.
>
> And either way, this should conform to the standard clock binding, not
> use something locally hacked up.
>
> >>> + (see include/linux/rfkill-gpio.h)
> >>
> >> IMO device tree bindings should be fully documented in this file,
> >> rather than needing to look at a separate header. This is particularly
> >> true if the binding is used in another project.
> >
> > Correct. A binding should not be Linux specific. It should describe the h/w.
> >
> >>> +
> >>> +Examples:
> >>> +
> >>> +rfkill-switches {
> >>> + compatible = "rfkill-gpio";
> >>> +
> >>> + wifi {
> >>> + label = "wifi";
> >>> + reset-gpio = <&gpio 25 0>; /* Active high */
> >>> + shutdown-gpio = <&gpio 85 0>; /* Active high */
> >>> + type = <1>;
> >>> + };
> >>> +
> >>> + bt {
> >>> + label = "bluetooth";
> >>> + reset-gpio = <&gpio 17 0>; /* Active high */
> >>> + shutdown-gpio = <&gpio 35 0>; /* Active high */
> >>> + type = <1>;
> >>> + };
> >
> > Why wouldn't the gpio lines just be part of the bt and wifi device nodes
> > themselves? The DT is supposed to describe h/w connections.
>
> The thing is, that "rfkill" isn't a _device_, and Marc is trying to
> describe it as one. It's really just a software abstraction of a
> collection of power supplies and/or GPIO lines that are used to power
> up/down specific peripherals.
>
> I know that the USB modem, for example, is probed through autoprobing
> the USB bus. So there's no device to associate it with, per se. But
> the USB slot that the modem is connected to, which is also the
> connector that the GPIO controls the power supplies and reset line to,
> are connected directly to one of the USB host controllers, right? So
> maybe describing it there is a better option.
>
> That still leaves the issue of actually having something to bind it
> against. As I already said, rfkill isn't a device, so crafting one
> just because linux wants one is the wrong way to go about. Maybe using
> /chosen to refer to the device nodes for the GPIO lines under USB
> instead, and have rfkill look for those and create a device if they're
> found is a better way to go about it.
So to move forward, what about a "fake" device like this?
usb@c5000000 {
wifi-card@1 { /* 1nd port on usb bus 1 */
compatible = "rfkill-gpio";
wifi {
label = "internal wifi";
reset-gpios = <&gpio 25 0>; /* Active high */
shutdown-gpios = <&gpio 85 0>; /* Active high */
type = "wlan";
clocks = <&tegra-car 17>;
};
};
bt-card@2 { /* 2rd port on usb bus 1 */
compatible = "rfkill-gpio";
bt {
label = "internal bluetooth";
reset-gpios = <&gpio 17 0>; /* Active high */
shutdown-gpios = <&gpio 35 0>; /* Active high */
type = "bluetooth";
};
};
};
I hope this won't confuse the usb controller.
Marc
On 02/12/2012 02:21 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Marc,
>
> On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Marc Dietrich <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Add device tree bindings information for rfkill gpio switches.
>>
>> Cc: [email protected]
>> Cc: "John W. Linville" <[email protected]>
>> Cc: Johannes Berg <[email protected]>
>> Cc: Rhyland Klein <[email protected]>
>> Cc: Grant Likely <[email protected]>
>> Cc: [email protected]
>> Signed-off-by: Marc Dietrich <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/rfkill.txt | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/rfkill.txt
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/rfkill.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/rfkill.txt
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..22bf22a
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/rfkill.txt
>> @@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
>> +RFKILL switches connected to GPIO lines
>> +
>> +Required properties:
>> +- compatible : should be "rfkill-gpio".
>> +
>> +Each rfkill switch is represented as a sub-node of the rfkill-gpio device.
>> +Each node has a label property which represents the name of the corresponding
>> +rfkill device.
>> +
>> +RFKILL sub-node properties:
>> +- label : (optional) The label for this rfkill switch. If omitted, the label is
>> + taken from the node name (excluding the unit address).
>> +- reset-gpio, shutdown-gpio : Should specify the rfkill gpios for reset and
>> + shutdown (see "Specifying GPIO information for devices" in
>
> Should that be reset-gpios, shutdown-gpios? Even though you have only
> one it seems that people put an 's' on the end.
>
>> + Documentation/devicetree/booting-without-of.txt).
>> +- type : enumerated type of the gpio (see include/linux/rfkill.h).
>
> It would be better I think if this were explicit here. If you have a
> number, then what values does it take and what do they mean?
>
>> +- clock : (optional) name of the clock name associated with the rfkill switch
>
> Can this be a phandle instead of a string?
>
This seems to be in the wrong place altogether. The gpio controller
would have a clock, not particular gpio line.
>> + (see include/linux/rfkill-gpio.h)
>
> IMO device tree bindings should be fully documented in this file,
> rather than needing to look at a separate header. This is particularly
> true if the binding is used in another project.
>
Correct. A binding should not be Linux specific. It should describe the h/w.
>> +
>> +Examples:
>> +
>> +rfkill-switches {
>> + compatible = "rfkill-gpio";
>> +
>> + wifi {
>> + label = "wifi";
>> + reset-gpio = <&gpio 25 0>; /* Active high */
>> + shutdown-gpio = <&gpio 85 0>; /* Active high */
>> + type = <1>;
>> + };
>> +
>> + bt {
>> + label = "bluetooth";
>> + reset-gpio = <&gpio 17 0>; /* Active high */
>> + shutdown-gpio = <&gpio 35 0>; /* Active high */
>> + type = <1>;
>> + };
Why wouldn't the gpio lines just be part of the bt and wifi device nodes
themselves? The DT is supposed to describe h/w connections.
Rob
>> +};
>> --
>> 1.7.5.4
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in
>> the body of a message to [email protected]
>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
> Regards,
> Simon
> _______________________________________________
> devicetree-discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
Hi Marc,
On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Marc Dietrich <[email protected]> wrote:
> Add device tree bindings information for rfkill gpio switches.
>
> Cc: [email protected]
> Cc: "John W. Linville" <[email protected]>
> Cc: Johannes Berg <[email protected]>
> Cc: Rhyland Klein <[email protected]>
> Cc: Grant Likely <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]
> Signed-off-by: Marc Dietrich <[email protected]>
> ---
> ?Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/rfkill.txt | ? 38 +++++++++++++++++++++
> ?1 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> ?create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/rfkill.txt
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/rfkill.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/rfkill.txt
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..22bf22a
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/rfkill.txt
> @@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
> +RFKILL switches connected to GPIO lines
> +
> +Required properties:
> +- compatible : should be "rfkill-gpio".
> +
> +Each rfkill switch is represented as a sub-node of the rfkill-gpio device.
> +Each node has a label property which represents the name of the corresponding
> +rfkill device.
> +
> +RFKILL sub-node properties:
> +- label : ?(optional) The label for this rfkill switch. ?If omitted, the label is
> + ?taken from the node name (excluding the unit address).
> +- reset-gpio, shutdown-gpio : ?Should specify the rfkill gpios for reset and
> + ?shutdown (see "Specifying GPIO information for devices" in
Should that be reset-gpios, shutdown-gpios? Even though you have only
one it seems that people put an 's' on the end.
> + ?Documentation/devicetree/booting-without-of.txt).
> +- type : enumerated type of the gpio (see include/linux/rfkill.h).
It would be better I think if this were explicit here. If you have a
number, then what values does it take and what do they mean?
> +- clock : (optional) name of the clock name associated with the rfkill switch
Can this be a phandle instead of a string?
> + ?(see include/linux/rfkill-gpio.h)
IMO device tree bindings should be fully documented in this file,
rather than needing to look at a separate header. This is particularly
true if the binding is used in another project.
> +
> +Examples:
> +
> +rfkill-switches {
> + ? ? ? compatible = "rfkill-gpio";
> +
> + ? ? ? wifi {
> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? label = "wifi";
> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? reset-gpio = <&gpio 25 0>; /* Active high */
> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? shutdown-gpio = <&gpio 85 0>; /* Active high */
> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? type = <1>;
> + ? ? ? };
> +
> + ? ? ? bt {
> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? label = "bluetooth";
> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? reset-gpio = <&gpio 17 0>; /* Active high */
> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? shutdown-gpio = <&gpio 35 0>; /* Active high */
> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? type = <1>;
> + ? ? ? };
> +};
> --
> 1.7.5.4
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at ?http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Regards,
Simon
On Sun, 2012-02-12 at 11:13 -0800, Marc Dietrich wrote:
> This adds device tree support for rfkill-gpio. The optional platform
> paramters gpio_runtime_close and gpio_runtime_setup are not implemented.
>
> Cc: [email protected]
> Cc: "John W. Linville" <[email protected]>
> Cc: Johannes Berg <[email protected]>
> Cc: Rhyland Klein <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Marc Dietrich <[email protected]>
> +
> static int rfkill_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> {
> struct rfkill_gpio_data *rfkill;
> struct rfkill_gpio_platform_data *pdata = pdev->dev.platform_data;
> + struct device_node *np = pdev->dev.of_node;
> int ret = 0;
> int len = 0;
>
> + if (np)
> + pdata = rfkill_gpio_parse_pdata(pdev);
> +
The only concern I have is the precedence of devicetree settings vs
platform data settings? If there is pdata passed in from board file
initialization, and there is a device tree (a corner case but I think a
valid one) then I believe the order would be that defined pdata would
override the devicetree settings. That way if someone wanted to make a
quick update, they wouldn't need to change the boot loader as well.
> if (!pdata) {
> pr_warn("%s: No platform data specified\n", __func__);
> return -EINVAL;
> @@ -217,6 +273,7 @@ static struct platform_driver rfkill_gpio_driver = {
> .driver = {
> .name = "rfkill_gpio",
> .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> + .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(of_rfkill_gpio_match),
> },
> };
>
-rhyland