Hi Daniel,
On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 11:57:54PM +0000, Daniel Scally wrote:
> Hi Laurent - thanks for the comments
>
> On 18/12/2020 16:53, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> >> +static void cio2_bridge_init_property_names(struct cio2_sensor *sensor)
> >> +{
> >> + strscpy(sensor->prop_names.clock_frequency, "clock-frequency",
> >> + sizeof(sensor->prop_names.clock_frequency));
> >> + strscpy(sensor->prop_names.rotation, "rotation",
> >> + sizeof(sensor->prop_names.rotation));
> >> + strscpy(sensor->prop_names.bus_type, "bus-type",
> >> + sizeof(sensor->prop_names.bus_type));
> >> + strscpy(sensor->prop_names.data_lanes, "data-lanes",
> >> + sizeof(sensor->prop_names.data_lanes));
> >> + strscpy(sensor->prop_names.remote_endpoint, "remote-endpoint",
> >> + sizeof(sensor->prop_names.remote_endpoint));
> >> + strscpy(sensor->prop_names.link_frequencies, "link-frequencies",
> >> + sizeof(sensor->prop_names.link_frequencies));
> >
> > Just curious, was there anything not working correctly with the proposal
> > I made ?
> >
> > static const struct cio2_property_names prop_names = {
> > .clock_frequency = "clock-frequency",
> > .rotation = "rotation",
> > .bus_type = "bus-type",
> > .data_lanes = "data-lanes",
> > .remote_endpoint = "remote-endpoint",
> > };
> >
> > static void cio2_bridge_init_property_names(struct cio2_sensor *sensor)
> > {
> > sensor->prop_names = prop_names;
> > }
> >
> > It generates a warning when the string is too long for the field size,
> > which should help catching issues at compilation time.
>
> Yes, though I don't know how much of a real-world problem it would have
> been - if you recall we have the issue that the device grabs a reference
> to the software_nodes (after we stopped delaying until after the
> i2c_client is available), which means we can't safely free the
> cio2_bridge struct on module unload. That also means we can't rely on
> those pointers to string literals existing, because if the ipu3-cio2
> module gets unloaded they'll be gone.
But the strings above are not stored as literals in .rodata, they're
copied in prop_names (itself in .rodata), which is then copied to
sensor->prop_names.
> Shame, as it's way neater.
>
> >> +static void cio2_bridge_init_swnode_names(struct cio2_sensor *sensor)
> >> +{
> >> + snprintf(sensor->node_names.remote_port, 7, "port@%u",
> >> sensor->ssdb.link);
> >> + strscpy(sensor->node_names.port, "port@0",
> >> sizeof(sensor->node_names.port));
> >> + strscpy(sensor->node_names.endpoint, "endpoint@0",
> >> sizeof(sensor->node_names.endpoint));
> >
> > I'd wrap lines, but maybe that's because I'm an old-school, 80-columns
> > programmer :-)
>
> Heh sure, I'll wrap them.
>
> >> +static int cio2_bridge_connect_sensors(struct cio2_bridge *bridge,
> >> + struct pci_dev *cio2)
> >> +{
> >> + struct fwnode_handle *fwnode;
> >> + struct cio2_sensor *sensor;
> >> + struct acpi_device *adev;
> >> + unsigned int i;
> >> + int ret = 0;
> >> +
> >> + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(cio2_supported_sensors); i++) {
> >> + const struct cio2_sensor_config *cfg =
> >> &cio2_supported_sensors[i];
> >> +
> >> + for_each_acpi_dev_match(adev, cfg->hid, NULL, -1) {
> >> + if (bridge->n_sensors >= CIO2_NUM_PORTS) {
> >> + dev_warn(&cio2->dev, "Exceeded available CIO2
> >> ports\n");
> >> + /* overflow i so outer loop ceases */
> >> + i = ARRAY_SIZE(cio2_supported_sensors);
> >> + break;
> >
> > Or just
> >
> > return 0;
> >
> > ?
>
> Derp, yes of course.
>
>
> >> +/* Data representation as it is in ACPI SSDB buffer */
> >> +struct cio2_sensor_ssdb {
> >> + u8 version; /* 0000 */
> >> + u8 sku; /* 0001 */
> >> + u8 guid_csi2[16]; /* 0002 */
> >> + u8 devfunction; /* 0003 */
> >> + u8 bus; /* 0004 */
> >> + u32 dphylinkenfuses; /* 0005 */
> >> + u32 clockdiv; /* 0009 */
> >> + u8 link; /* 0013 */
> >> + u8 lanes; /* 0014 */
> >> + u32 csiparams[10]; /* 0015 */
> >> + u32 maxlanespeed; /* 0019 */
> >> + u8 sensorcalibfileidx; /* 0023 */
> >> + u8 sensorcalibfileidxInMBZ[3]; /* 0024 */
> >> + u8 romtype; /* 0025 */
> >> + u8 vcmtype; /* 0026 */
> >> + u8 platforminfo; /* 0027 */
> >
> > Why stop at 27 ? :-) I'd either go all the way, or not at all. It's also
> > quite customary to represent offset as hex values, as that's what most
> > hex editors / viewers will show.
>
> Oops - that was actually just me debugging...I guess I might actually
> finish it, converted to hex. It came in useful reading the DSDT to have
> that somewhere easy to refer to.
>
> > Reviewed-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinch...@ideasonboard.com>
>
> Nice - thank you!
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
