bh1770 hacks: get it to work on n950

Hi!

Ok, not for application, but I can get light sensor to work.

Signed-off-by Pavel Machek <[email protected]>

arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3-n950.dts +17 -0

index 50c4fc6..15841f7 100644
@@ -150,6 +150,23 @@
                };
        };
 
+       bh1770 at 38 {
+       		 compatible = "bh1770glc";
+		 reg = <0x38>;
+
+		 vdd-supply = <&vaux1>;
+		 leds-supply = <&vaux1>; /* FIXME: really on vbat */
+
+		 /* GPIO 83 on n950.
+ 		 .leds              = BHSFH_LED1,
+ 		 .led_max_curr      = BHSFH_LED_100mA,
+ 		 .led_def_curr      = BHSFH_LED_50mA,
+ 		 .glass_attenuation = (16384 * 385) / 100, ... about 3.85x filtering
+ 		 */
+       };
+
+       /* Also TLV320DAC33 and TPA6130A2 */
+
 	touch at 4b {
 		compatible = "atmel,maxtouch";
 		reg = <0x4b>;

drivers/misc/bh1770glc.c +33 -4

index 9c62bf0..f08df29 100644
@@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
  *
  */
 
+#define DEBUG
 #include <linux/kernel.h>
 #include <linux/module.h>
 #include <linux/i2c.h>

@@ -525,16 +526,22 @@ static int bh1770_detect(struct bh1770_chip *chip)
 	s32 ret;
 	u8 manu, part;
 
+	printk("Detect...\n");
+
 	ret = i2c_smbus_read_byte_data(client, BH1770_MANUFACT_ID);
 	if (ret < 0)
 		goto error;
 	manu = (u8)ret;
 
+	printk("Detect... manufact\n");
+
 	ret = i2c_smbus_read_byte_data(client, BH1770_PART_ID);
 	if (ret < 0)
 		goto error;
 	part = (u8)ret;
 
+	printk("Detect... part ... got %x %x\n", manu, part);
+
 	chip->revision = (part & BH1770_REV_MASK) >> BH1770_REV_SHIFT;
 	chip->prox_coef = BH1770_COEF_SCALER;
 	chip->prox_const = 0;

@@ -1179,6 +1186,8 @@ static const struct attribute_group bh1770_attribute_group = {
 	.attrs = sysfs_attrs
 };
 
+struct bh1770_platform_data def = {};
+
 static int bh1770_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
 				const struct i2c_device_id *id)
 {

@@ -1189,6 +1198,8 @@ static int bh1770_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
 	if (!chip)
 		return -ENOMEM;
 
+	printk("bh1770: probe\n");
+
 	i2c_set_clientdata(client, chip);
 	chip->client  = client;
 

@@ -1198,10 +1209,12 @@ static int bh1770_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
 
 	if (client->dev.platform_data == NULL) {
 		dev_err(&client->dev, "platform data is mandatory\n");
-		return -EINVAL;
+		//return -EINVAL;
 	}
 
 	chip->pdata		= client->dev.platform_data;
+	if (!chip->pdata)
+		chip->pdata = &def;
 	chip->lux_calib		= BH1770_LUX_NEUTRAL_CALIB_VALUE;
 	chip->lux_rate_index	= BH1770_LUX_DEFAULT_RATE;
 	chip->lux_threshold_lo	= BH1770_LUX_DEF_THRES;

@@ -1220,6 +1233,8 @@ static int bh1770_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
 	chip->prox_rate		= BH1770_PROX_DEFAULT_RATE;
 	chip->prox_data		= 0;
 
+	printk("bh1770: regulators\n");
+	
 	chip->regs[0].supply = reg_vcc;
 	chip->regs[1].supply = reg_vleds;
 

@@ -1227,14 +1242,12 @@ static int bh1770_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
 				      ARRAY_SIZE(chip->regs), chip->regs);
 	if (err < 0) {
 		dev_err(&client->dev, "Cannot get regulators\n");
-		return err;
 	}
 
 	err = regulator_bulk_enable(ARRAY_SIZE(chip->regs),
 				chip->regs);
 	if (err < 0) {
 		dev_err(&client->dev, "Cannot enable regulators\n");
-		return err;
 	}
 
 	usleep_range(BH1770_STARTUP_DELAY, BH1770_STARTUP_DELAY * 2);

@@ -1242,6 +1255,8 @@ static int bh1770_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
 	if (err < 0)
 		goto fail0;
 
+	printk("bh1770: detected\n");
+
 	/* Start chip */
 	bh1770_chip_on(chip);
 	pm_runtime_set_active(&client->dev);

@@ -1269,6 +1284,8 @@ static int bh1770_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
 		goto fail1;
 	}
 
+	printk("bh1770: sysfs ok\n");
+	
 	/*
 	 * Chip needs level triggered interrupt to work. However,
 	 * level triggering doesn't work always correctly with power

@@ -1282,8 +1299,12 @@ static int bh1770_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
 	if (err) {
 		dev_err(&client->dev, "could not get IRQ %d\n",
 			client->irq);
-		goto fail2;
+		//goto fail2;
 	}
+
+	printk("bh1770: irq ok, all done\n");
+	err = 0;
+	
 	regulator_bulk_disable(ARRAY_SIZE(chip->regs), chip->regs);
 	return err;
 fail2:

@@ -1393,10 +1414,18 @@ static const struct dev_pm_ops bh1770_pm_ops = {
 	SET_RUNTIME_PM_OPS(bh1770_runtime_suspend, bh1770_runtime_resume, NULL)
 };
 
+#ifdef CONFIG_OF
+static const struct of_device_id bh1770_of_match_table[] = {
+	{ .compatible = "bq27200" },
+};
+MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, bh1770_of_match_table);
+#endif	
+
 static struct i2c_driver bh1770_driver = {
 	.driver	 = {
 		.name	= "bh1770glc",
 		.pm	= &bh1770_pm_ops,
+		.of_match_table = of_match_ptr(bh1770_of_match_table),
 	},
 	.probe	  = bh1770_probe,
 	.remove	  = bh1770_remove,

Signature · 3 lines

-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Hi,

Quoted 2 lines · Pavel Machek

Hi!

Quoted 3 lines

Ok, not for application, but I can get light sensor to work.

Signed-off-by Pavel Machek <[email protected]>

There is no mainline user of this driver and it has a custom API, so I think the driver should be dropped and an IIO based one should be created instead.

Quoted 9 lines · Sebastian Reichel

Hi,

Quoted 5 lines · Pavel Machek

Hi!

Ok, not for application, but I can get light sensor to work.

Signed-off-by Pavel Machek <[email protected]>

Quoted 3 lines

There is no mainline user of this driver and it has a custom API, so I think the driver should be dropped and an IIO based one should be created instead.

While I agree IIO interface might be better, and would welcome patches, I don't think that dropping the driver is right action at this point.

Quoted 14 lines · Pavel Machek

Quoted 12 lines · Sebastian Reichel

Hi,

Quoted 5 lines · Pavel Machek

Hi!

Ok, not for application, but I can get light sensor to work.

Signed-off-by Pavel Machek <[email protected]>

There is no mainline user of this driver and it has a custom API, so I think the driver should be dropped and an IIO based one should be created instead.

Quoted 3 lines

While I agree IIO interface might be better, and would welcome patches, I don't think that dropping the driver is right action at this point.

That's the most elegant solution at all. How would you later motivate people to try and test IIO driver? Let's pretend this patch have never existed until someone notices and starts playing "you broke kernel ABI" game.

Quoted 15 lines · Ladislav Michl

Quoted 14 lines · Pavel Machek

Quoted 12 lines · Sebastian Reichel

Hi,

Quoted 5 lines · Pavel Machek

Hi!

Ok, not for application, but I can get light sensor to work.

Signed-off-by Pavel Machek <[email protected]>

There is no mainline user of this driver and it has a custom API, so I think the driver should be dropped and an IIO based one should be created instead.

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 3 lines

While I agree IIO interface might be better, and would welcome patches, I don't think that dropping the driver is right action at this point.

That's the most elegant solution at all. How would you later motivate people to try and test IIO driver? Let's pretend this patch have never existed until someone notices and starts playing "you broke kernel ABI" game.

I'm using the driver; I'm even interested in fixing it. Please try not to make my job any harder than it needs to be, and I'll try to break ABI.

That goes to Sebastian, too.

If you want to convert the driver to IIO, please do so, I can test the patches.