On 09/22/2014 06:51 PM, George Cherian wrote:
>
> On 09/22/2014 01:37 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>> Hi George,
>>
>> This patch removes 'gpio_active_low' field of struct gpio_extcon_data.
>> But, include/linux/extcon-gpio.h has the description of 'gpio_active_low' field.
> Yes didn't want the platform data users to break.
> Actually I couldn't find any platform users for this driver. Could you please point me to
> one if in case I missed it. If non present then why cant we get rid of platform data altogether.
Right,
But, Why do you support platform data on as following your patch?
- [PATCH 3/5] extcon: gpio: Add dt support for the driver.
According to your comment, you had to remove the support for platform data.
IMO,
I think this patchset must need to reorder the sequence of patchset.
Also, this patchset is more detailed description.
>>
>> Also,
>> This patch has not included the any description/comment of removing 'gpio_active_low'.
>>
>> Also,
>> How to set 'FLAG_ACTIVE_LOW' bit for gpio when using platform data?
> Now that we are using gpiod_* API's we need not check for gpio_active_low from this driver.
This patch just use gpiod API instead of legacy gpio API.
I think that if extcon-gpio don't need to check gpio_activ_low field,
you have to implement dt support patch before this patch.
>
>> This patch don't call 'set_bit()' function to set FLAG_ACTIVE_LOW flag.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Chanwoo Choi
>>
>> On 09/09/2014 01:14 PM, George Cherian wrote:
>>> Convert the driver to use gpiod_* API's.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: George Cherian <george.cherian@xxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/extcon/extcon-gpio.c | 18 +++++++-----------
>>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/extcon/extcon-gpio.c b/drivers/extcon/extcon-gpio.c
>>> index 72f19a3..25269f6 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/extcon/extcon-gpio.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/extcon/extcon-gpio.c
>>> @@ -33,8 +33,7 @@
>>> struct gpio_extcon_data {
>>> struct extcon_dev *edev;
>>> - unsigned gpio;
>>> - bool gpio_active_low;
>>> + struct gpio_desc *gpiod;
>>> const char *state_on;
>>> const char *state_off;
>>> int irq;
>>> @@ -50,9 +49,7 @@ static void gpio_extcon_work(struct work_struct *work)
>>> container_of(to_delayed_work(work), struct gpio_extcon_data,
>>> work);
>>> - state = gpio_get_value(data->gpio);
>>> - if (data->gpio_active_low)
>>> - state = !state;
>>> + state = gpiod_get_value(data->gpiod);
>>> extcon_set_state(data->edev, state);
>>> }
>>> @@ -106,22 +103,21 @@ static int gpio_extcon_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>> }
>>> extcon_data->edev->name = pdata->name;
>>> - extcon_data->gpio = pdata->gpio;
>>> - extcon_data->gpio_active_low = pdata->gpio_active_low;
>>> + extcon_data->gpiod = gpio_to_desc(pdata->gpio);
>>> extcon_data->state_on = pdata->state_on;
>>> extcon_data->state_off = pdata->state_off;
>>> extcon_data->check_on_resume = pdata->check_on_resume;
>>> if (pdata->state_on && pdata->state_off)
>>> extcon_data->edev->print_state = extcon_gpio_print_state;
>>> - ret = devm_gpio_request_one(&pdev->dev, extcon_data->gpio, GPIOF_DIR_IN,
>>> + ret = devm_gpio_request_one(&pdev->dev, pdata->gpio, GPIOF_DIR_IN,
>>> pdev->name);
>>> if (ret < 0)
>>> return ret;
>>> if (pdata->debounce) {
>>> - ret = gpio_set_debounce(extcon_data->gpio,
>>> - pdata->debounce * 1000);
>>> + ret = gpiod_set_debounce(extcon_data->gpiod,
>>> + pdata->debounce * 1000);
>>> if (ret < 0)
>>> extcon_data->debounce_jiffies =
>>> msecs_to_jiffies(pdata->debounce);
>>> @@ -133,7 +129,7 @@ static int gpio_extcon_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>> INIT_DELAYED_WORK(&extcon_data->work, gpio_extcon_work);
>>> - extcon_data->irq = gpio_to_irq(extcon_data->gpio);
>>> + extcon_data->irq = gpiod_to_irq(extcon_data->gpiod);
>>> if (extcon_data->irq < 0)
>>> return extcon_data->irq;
>>>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
