1. 02 Jan, 2015 8 commits
  2. 24 Dec, 2014 5 commits
  3. 23 Dec, 2014 1 commit
    • Greg Kroah-Hartman's avatar
      greybus: add module support · df671553
      Greg Kroah-Hartman authored
      Modules in the greybus system sit above the interface, so insert them
      early in the sysfs tree.  We dynamically create them when we have an
      interface that references a module, as we don't get a "module create"
      message directly.  They also dynamically go away when the last interface
      associated with a module is removed.
      
      Naming scheme for modules/interfaces/bundles/connections is bumped up by
      one ':', and now looks like the following:
      
      /sys/bus/greybus $ tree
      .
      ├── devices
      │   ├── 7 -> ../../../devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:14.0/usb1/1-1/7
      │   ├── 7:7 -> ../../../devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:14.0/usb1/1-1/7/7:7
      │   ├── 7:7:0 -> ../../../devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:14.0/usb1/1-1/7/7:7/7:7:0
      │   └── 7:7:0:1 -> ../../../devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:14.0/usb1/1-1/7/7:7/7:7:0/7:7:0:1
      ├── drivers
      ├── drivers_autoprobe
      ├── drivers_probe
      └── uevent
      
      6 directories, 3 files
      /sys/bus/greybus $ grep . devices/*/uevent
      devices/7/uevent:DEVTYPE=greybus_module
      devices/7:7/uevent:DEVTYPE=greybus_interface
      devices/7:7:0/uevent:DEVTYPE=greybus_bundle
      devices/7:7:0:1/uevent:DEVTYPE=greybus_connection
      
      We still have some "confusion" about interface ids and module ids, which
      will be cleaned up later when the svc control protocol changes die down,
      right now we just name a module after the interface as we don't have any
      modules that have multiple interfaces in our systems.
      
      This has been tested with gbsim.
      Signed-off-by: default avatarGreg Kroah-Hartman <greg@kroah.com>
      df671553
  4. 19 Dec, 2014 9 commits
  5. 13 Dec, 2014 3 commits
  6. 12 Dec, 2014 13 commits
  7. 10 Dec, 2014 1 commit
    • Alex Elder's avatar
      greybus: ENODEV can be an expected error too · 7de3e650
      Alex Elder authored
      When probing for i2c devices, a read transfer operation can be used.
      In this case, it is expected that some devices will not be found, so
      ENODEV is an expected failure.  Don't issue a warning if the return
      value is -ENODEV.
      
      Note:  I anticipate we might have to be more precise in identifying
      this specific case, but for now this eliminates a bogus warning when
      probing i2c devices.
      Signed-off-by: default avatarAlex Elder <elder@linaro.org>
      Signed-off-by: default avatarGreg Kroah-Hartman <greg@kroah.com>
      7de3e650