mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Aswath Govindraju <a-govindraju@ti.com>
To: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>, Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>,
	Peter Rosin <peda@axentia.se>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@grandegger.com>,
	Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@ti.com>,
	Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>, <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-can@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-phy@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 4/4] phy: phy-can-transceiver: Add support for setting mux
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2021 18:50:00 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <47a0f27f-4d44-cc8f-f2ef-0919f38843bf@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211122131221.i3djuarw2ae5lbdk@pengutronix.de>

Hi Marc,

On 22/11/21 6:42 pm, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
> On 22.11.2021 18:26:24, Aswath Govindraju wrote:
>> On some boards, for routing CAN signals from controller to transceiver,
>> muxes might need to be set. Therefore, add support for setting the mux by
>> reading the mux-controls property from the device tree node.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Aswath Govindraju <a-govindraju@ti.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/phy/phy-can-transceiver.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 26 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/phy/phy-can-transceiver.c b/drivers/phy/phy-can-transceiver.c
>> index 6f3fe37dee0e..15056b9d68ba 100644
>> --- a/drivers/phy/phy-can-transceiver.c
>> +++ b/drivers/phy/phy-can-transceiver.c
>> @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
>>  #include<linux/module.h>
>>  #include<linux/gpio.h>
>>  #include<linux/gpio/consumer.h>
>> +#include <linux/mux/consumer.h>
>>  
>>  struct can_transceiver_data {
>>  	u32 flags;
>> @@ -21,13 +22,23 @@ struct can_transceiver_phy {
>>  	struct phy *generic_phy;
>>  	struct gpio_desc *standby_gpio;
>>  	struct gpio_desc *enable_gpio;
>> +	struct mux_control *mux_ctrl;
>>  };
>>  
>>  /* Power on function */
>>  static int can_transceiver_phy_power_on(struct phy *phy)
>>  {
>> +	int ret;
>>  	struct can_transceiver_phy *can_transceiver_phy = phy_get_drvdata(phy);
>>  
>> +	if (can_transceiver_phy->mux_ctrl) {
>> +		ret = mux_control_select(can_transceiver_phy->mux_ctrl,
>> +					 mux_control_enable_state(can_transceiver_phy->mux_ctrl));
>> +		if (ret) {
>> +			dev_err(&phy->dev, "Failed to select CAN mux: %d\n", ret);
>> +			return ret;
>> +		}
>> +	}
>>  	if (can_transceiver_phy->standby_gpio)
>>  		gpiod_set_value_cansleep(can_transceiver_phy->standby_gpio, 0);
>>  	if (can_transceiver_phy->enable_gpio)
>> @@ -45,6 +56,8 @@ static int can_transceiver_phy_power_off(struct phy *phy)
>>  		gpiod_set_value_cansleep(can_transceiver_phy->standby_gpio, 1);
>>  	if (can_transceiver_phy->enable_gpio)
>>  		gpiod_set_value_cansleep(can_transceiver_phy->enable_gpio, 0);
>> +	if (can_transceiver_phy->mux_ctrl)
>> +		mux_control_deselect(can_transceiver_phy->mux_ctrl);
>>  
>>  	return 0;
>>  }
>> @@ -95,6 +108,19 @@ static int can_transceiver_phy_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>  	match = of_match_node(can_transceiver_phy_ids, pdev->dev.of_node);
>>  	drvdata = match->data;
>>  
>> +	if (of_property_read_bool(dev->of_node, "mux-controls")) {
>> +		struct mux_control *control;
>> +		int ret;
>> +
>> +		control = devm_mux_control_get(dev, NULL);
>> +		if (IS_ERR(control)) {
>> +			ret = PTR_ERR(control);
>> +			dev_err_probe(&pdev->dev, ret, "failed to get mux\n");
>> +			return PTR_ERR(control);
>> +		}
>> +		can_transceiver_phy->mux_ctrl = control;
>> +	}
> 
> What about adding a devm_mux_control_get_optional(), which doesn't
> return a -ENODEV but a NULL pointer if the device doesn't exist?
> 

I tried adding it in the following manner,

+/**
+ * devm_mux_control_optional_get() - Optionally get the mux-control for a
+ *                                  device, with resource management.
+ * @dev: The device that needs a mux-control.
+ * @mux_name: The name identifying the mux-control.
+ *
+ * This differs from devm_mux_control_get in that if the mux does not
+ * exist, it is not considered an error and -ENODEV will not be
+ * returned. Instead the NULL is returned.
+ *
+ * Return: Pointer to the mux-control, or an ERR_PTR with a negative errno.
+ */
+struct mux_control *devm_mux_control_optional_get(struct device *dev,
+                                                 const char *mux_name)
+{
+       struct mux_control *mux_ctrl;
+
+       mux_ctrl = devm_mux_control_get(dev, mux_name);
+       if (PTR_ERR(mux_ctrl) == -ENOENT)
+                mux_ctrl = NULL;
+
+       return mux_ctrl;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(devm_mux_control_optional_get);
+

However the issue is that there is a print in mux_control_get()
 dev_err(dev, "%pOF: failed to get mux-control %s(%i)\n",

which is getting printed, whenever mux-controls property is not found.
Therefore, I was not sure about how to go about this issue and did not
implement it.

Thanks,
Aswath

> Marc
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2021-11-22 13:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-11-22 12:56 [PATCH RFC v2 0/4] MUX: Add support for reading enable state from DT Aswath Govindraju
2021-11-22 12:56 ` [PATCH RFC v2 1/4] dt-bindings: mux: Increase the number of arguments in mux-controls Aswath Govindraju
2021-11-22 12:56 ` [PATCH RFC v2 2/4] dt-bindings: phy: ti,tcan104x-can: Document mux-controls property Aswath Govindraju
2021-11-22 12:56 ` [PATCH RFC v2 3/4] mux: Add support for reading mux enable state from DT Aswath Govindraju
2021-11-22 18:59   ` Peter Rosin
2021-11-23  4:14     ` Aswath Govindraju
2021-11-23  4:29       ` Aswath Govindraju
2021-11-22 12:56 ` [PATCH RFC v2 4/4] phy: phy-can-transceiver: Add support for setting mux Aswath Govindraju
2021-11-22 13:06   ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2021-11-22 13:12   ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2021-11-22 13:20     ` Aswath Govindraju [this message]
2021-11-22 13:30       ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2021-11-22 13:44   ` Kishon Vijay Abraham I
2021-11-23  8:14 ` [PATCH RFC v2 0/4] MUX: Add support for reading enable state from DT Aswath Govindraju

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=47a0f27f-4d44-cc8f-f2ef-0919f38843bf@ti.com \
    --to=a-govindraju@ti.com \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kishon@ti.com \
    --cc=linux-can@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-phy@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=mkl@pengutronix.de \
    --cc=nm@ti.com \
    --cc=peda@axentia.se \
    --cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=vigneshr@ti.com \
    --cc=vkoul@kernel.org \
    --cc=wg@grandegger.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®