Hi Gwendal, Many thanks for the patches, some few comments below.
On 21/10/19 7:53, Gwendal Grignou wrote: > Add a new function to return the number of MEMS sensors available in a > ChromeOS Embedded Controller. > It uses MOTIONSENSE_CMD_DUMP if available or a specific memory map ACPI > registers to find out. > > Also, make check_features public as it can be useful for other drivers > to know what the Embedded Controller supports. > > Signed-off-by: Gwendal Grignou <[email protected]> > --- > Changes in v2: > Fix spelling in commit message. > Cleanup the case where DUMP command is not supported. > Move code from mfd to platform/chrome/ > > drivers/mfd/cros_ec_dev.c | 32 ------ > drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c | 116 ++++++++++++++++++++ > include/linux/platform_data/cros_ec_proto.h | 5 + > 3 files changed, 121 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/mfd/cros_ec_dev.c b/drivers/mfd/cros_ec_dev.c > index 6e6dfd6c18711..a35104e35cb4e 100644 > --- a/drivers/mfd/cros_ec_dev.c > +++ b/drivers/mfd/cros_ec_dev.c > @@ -112,38 +112,6 @@ static const struct mfd_cell cros_ec_vbc_cells[] = { > { .name = "cros-ec-vbc", } > }; > > -static int cros_ec_check_features(struct cros_ec_dev *ec, int feature) > -{ > - struct cros_ec_command *msg; > - int ret; > - > - if (ec->features[0] == -1U && ec->features[1] == -1U) { > - /* features bitmap not read yet */ > - msg = kzalloc(sizeof(*msg) + sizeof(ec->features), GFP_KERNEL); > - if (!msg) > - return -ENOMEM; > - > - msg->command = EC_CMD_GET_FEATURES + ec->cmd_offset; > - msg->insize = sizeof(ec->features); > - > - ret = cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status(ec->ec_dev, msg); > - if (ret < 0) { > - dev_warn(ec->dev, "cannot get EC features: %d/%d\n", > - ret, msg->result); > - memset(ec->features, 0, sizeof(ec->features)); > - } else { > - memcpy(ec->features, msg->data, sizeof(ec->features)); > - } > - > - dev_dbg(ec->dev, "EC features %08x %08x\n", > - ec->features[0], ec->features[1]); > - > - kfree(msg); > - } > - > - return ec->features[feature / 32] & EC_FEATURE_MASK_0(feature); > -} > - > static void cros_ec_class_release(struct device *dev) > { > kfree(to_cros_ec_dev(dev)); > diff --git a/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c > b/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c > index 7db58771ec77c..2357c717399ad 100644 > --- a/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c > +++ b/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c > @@ -717,3 +717,119 @@ u32 cros_ec_get_host_event(struct cros_ec_device > *ec_dev) > return host_event; > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL(cros_ec_get_host_event); > + > +/** > + * cros_ec_check_features - Test for the presence of EC features > + * > + * Call this function to test whether the ChromeOS EC supports a feature. > + * > + * @ec_dev: EC device: does not have to be connected directly to the AP, > + * can be daisy chained through another device. > + * @feature: One of ec_feature_code bit. > + * @return: 1 if supported, 0 if not This is not kernel-doc compliant, check with kernel-doc script. > + */ > +int cros_ec_check_features(struct cros_ec_dev *ec, int feature) > +{ > + struct cros_ec_command *msg; > + int ret; > + > + if (ec->features[0] == -1U && ec->features[1] == -1U) { > + /* features bitmap not read yet */ > + msg = kzalloc(sizeof(*msg) + sizeof(ec->features), GFP_KERNEL); > + if (!msg) > + return -ENOMEM; > + > + msg->command = EC_CMD_GET_FEATURES + ec->cmd_offset; > + msg->insize = sizeof(ec->features); > + > + ret = cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status(ec->ec_dev, msg); > + if (ret < 0) { > + dev_warn(ec->dev, "cannot get EC features: %d/%d\n", > + ret, msg->result); > + memset(ec->features, 0, sizeof(ec->features)); > + } else { > + memcpy(ec->features, msg->data, sizeof(ec->features)); > + } > + > + dev_dbg(ec->dev, "EC features %08x %08x\n", > + ec->features[0], ec->features[1]); > + > + kfree(msg); > + } > + > + return ec->features[feature / 32] & EC_FEATURE_MASK_0(feature); > +} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cros_ec_check_features); > + > +/** > + * Return the number of MEMS sensors supported. > + * > + * @ec_dev: EC device: does not have to be connected directly to the AP, > + * can be daisy chained through another device. > + * Return < 0 in case of error. Same, this is not kernel-doc compliant, check with kernel-doc script. > + */ > +int cros_ec_get_sensor_count(struct cros_ec_dev *ec) > +{ > + /* > + * Issue a command to get the number of sensor reported. > + * If not supported, check for legacy mode. > + */ I'd prefer have this in the function documentation. > + int ret, sensor_count; > + struct ec_params_motion_sense *params; > + struct ec_response_motion_sense *resp; > + struct cros_ec_command *msg; > + struct cros_ec_device *ec_dev = ec->ec_dev; > + u8 status; > + nit: Reverse Christmas tree local variable ordering here please. > + msg = kzalloc(sizeof(struct cros_ec_command) + Better sizeof(*msg)? > + max(sizeof(*params), sizeof(*resp)), GFP_KERNEL); > + if (!msg) > + return -ENOMEM; > + > + msg->version = 1; > + msg->command = EC_CMD_MOTION_SENSE_CMD + ec->cmd_offset; > + msg->outsize = sizeof(*params); > + msg->insize = sizeof(*resp); > + > + params = (struct ec_params_motion_sense *)msg->data; > + params->cmd = MOTIONSENSE_CMD_DUMP; > + > + ret = cros_ec_cmd_xfer(ec->ec_dev, msg); > + if (ret < 0) { > + sensor_count = ret; > + } else if (msg->result != EC_RES_SUCCESS) { > + sensor_count = -EPROTO; > + } else { > + resp = (struct ec_response_motion_sense *)msg->data; > + sensor_count = resp->dump.sensor_count; > + } Can this be rewritten to? sensor_count = cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status(ec->ec_dev, msg); if (sensor_count >= 0) { resp = (struct ec_response_motion_sense *)msg->data; sensor_count = resp->dump.sensor_count; } > + kfree(msg); > + > + /* > + * Check legacy mode: Let's find out if sensors are accessible > + * via LPC interface. > + */ > + if (sensor_count == -EPROTO && > + ec->cmd_offset == 0 && > + ec_dev->cmd_readmem) { > + ret = ec_dev->cmd_readmem(ec_dev, EC_MEMMAP_ACC_STATUS, > + 1, &status); > + if ((ret >= 0) && Unnecessary parentheses around 'ret >= 0' > + (status & EC_MEMMAP_ACC_STATUS_PRESENCE_BIT)) { Unnecessary brackets > + /* > + * We have 2 sensors, one in the lid, one in the base. > + */ > + sensor_count = 2; > + } else { > + /* > + * EC uses LPC interface and no sensors are presented. > + */ > + sensor_count = 0; > + } > + } else if (sensor_count == -EPROTO) { > + /* EC responded, but does not understand DUMP command. */ > + sensor_count = 0; > + } > + return sensor_count; > +} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cros_ec_get_sensor_count); > diff --git a/include/linux/platform_data/cros_ec_proto.h > b/include/linux/platform_data/cros_ec_proto.h > index 0d4e4aaed37af..f3de0662135d5 100644 > --- a/include/linux/platform_data/cros_ec_proto.h > +++ b/include/linux/platform_data/cros_ec_proto.h > @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ > #include <linux/mutex.h> > #include <linux/notifier.h> > > +#include <linux/mfd/cros_ec.h> I am wondering if makes sense move 'struct cros_ec_dev' to cros_ec_proto.h and remove definitely include/mfd/cros_ec.h. However this could be a follow up patch. > #include <linux/platform_data/cros_ec_commands.h> > > #define CROS_EC_DEV_NAME "cros_ec" > @@ -213,4 +214,8 @@ int cros_ec_get_next_event(struct cros_ec_device *ec_dev, > bool *wake_event); > > u32 cros_ec_get_host_event(struct cros_ec_device *ec_dev); > > +int cros_ec_check_features(struct cros_ec_dev *ec, int feature); > + > +int cros_ec_get_sensor_count(struct cros_ec_dev *ec); > + > #endif /* __LINUX_CROS_EC_PROTO_H */ > Thanks, Enric
