Hi Linus,
On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 2:20 PM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 9:43 AM Geert Uytterhoeven
> <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Currently GPIO controllers can only be referred to by label in GPIO
> > lookup tables.
> >
> > Add support for looking them up by "gpiochipN" name, with "N" either the
> > corresponding GPIO device's ID number, or the GPIO controller's first
> > GPIO number.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> What the commit message is missing is a rationale, why is this needed?
Right. To be added: so they can be looked up in the GPIO lookup table
using either the chip's label, or the "gpiochipN" name.
> > If this is rejected, the GPIO Aggregator documentation must be updated.
> >
> > The second variant is currently used by the legacy sysfs interface only,
> > so perhaps the chip->base check should be dropped?
>
> Anything improving the sysfs is actively discouraged by me.
> If it is just about staying compatible it is another thing.
OK, so N must be the corresponding GPIO device's ID number.
> > +static int gpiochip_match_id(struct gpio_chip *chip, void *data)
> > +{
> > + int id = (uintptr_t)data;
> > +
> > + return id == chip->base || id == chip->gpiodev->id;
> > +}
> > static struct gpio_chip *find_chip_by_name(const char *name)
> > {
> > - return gpiochip_find((void *)name, gpiochip_match_name);
> > + struct gpio_chip *chip;
> > + int id;
> > +
> > + chip = gpiochip_find((void *)name, gpiochip_match_name);
> > + if (chip)
> > + return chip;
> > +
> > + if (!str_has_prefix(name, GPIOCHIP_NAME))
> > + return NULL;
> > +
> > + if (kstrtoint(name + strlen(GPIOCHIP_NAME), 10, &id))
> > + return NULL;
> > +
> > + return gpiochip_find((void *)(uintptr_t)id, gpiochip_match_id);
>
> Isn't it easier to just augment the existing match function to
> check like this:
>
> static int gpiochip_match_name(struct gpio_chip *chip, void *data)
> {
> const char *name = data;
>
> if (!strcmp(chip->label, name))
> return 0;
return true;
> return !strcmp(dev_name(&chip->gpiodev->dev), name);
> }
Oh, didn't think of using dev_name() on the gpiodev.
Yes, with the chip->base check removed, the code can be simplified.
Or just
return !strcmp(chip->label, name) ||
!strcmp(dev_name(&chip->gpiodev->dev), name);
> We should I guess also add some kerneldoc to say we first
> match on the label and second on dev_name().
OK.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
