Hi Andy, > El 4 mar 2021, a las 16:17, Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> escribió: > > On Thu, Mar 4, 2021 at 5:06 PM Álvaro Fernández Rojas <noltari@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> El 4 mar 2021, a las 11:35, Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> escribió: >>> On Thu, Mar 4, 2021 at 10:57 AM Álvaro Fernández Rojas >>> <noltari@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>> + * @of_node: (Optional) The device node >>> >>>> + struct device_node *of_node; >>> >>> Can we use fwnode from day 1, please? >> >> Could you explain this? I haven’t dealt with fwnode never :$ >> BTW, this is done to fix this check when parsing gpio ranges: >> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/f69d02e37a85645aa90d18cacfff36dba370f797/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c#L933-L934 > > Use struct fwnode_handle pointer instead of OF-specific one. But is that compatible with the current gpiolib-of code? :$ > > Also here is the question, why do you need to have that field in the > regmap config structure and can't simply use the parent's fwnode? > Also I'm puzzled why it's not working w/o this patch: GPIO library > effectively assigns parent's fwnode (okay, of_node right now). Because gpio regmap a child node of the pin controller, which is the one probed (gpio regmap is probed from the pin controller). Therefore the parent’s fwnode is useless, since the correct gpio_chip node is the child's one (we have pin-ranges declared in the child node, referencing the parent pinctrl node). > > -- > With Best Regards, > Andy Shevchenko Best regards, Álvaro.
