On Tue, 2014-09-23 at 21:18 -0700, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Mon 15 Sep 07:44 PDT 2014, Ivan T. Ivanov wrote:
>
<snip>
> > +static int pmic_gpio_of_xlate(struct gpio_chip *chip,
> > + const struct of_phandle_args *gpio_desc,
> > + u32 *flags)
> > +{
> > + if (chip->of_gpio_n_cells < 2)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > + if (flags)
> > + *flags = gpio_desc->args[1];
> > +
> > + return gpio_desc->args[0] - PMIC_GPIO_PHYSICAL_OFFSET;
> > +}
>
> If you change:
> gpiochip_add_pin_range(&state->chip, dev_name(dev), 0, 0, npins);
> to:
> gpiochip_add_pin_range(&state->chip, dev_name(dev), 1, 0, npins);
>
> And you treat the gpio functions as taking the gpio number instead of pinctrl
> number (i.e. subtract 1 in those), then gpiolib will provide this function for
> you.
>
I am unable to make this work. of_gpio_simple_xlate() didn't know that
GPIO range is offset with 1. Requesting last GPIO return error. And
debug output looks weird, for example:
# cat /sys/kernel/debug/gpio
...
GPIOs 220-255, platform/0.c000.gpios, 0.c000.gpios:
...
# cat /sys/kernel/debug/pinctrl/0.c000.gpios/gpio-ranges
GPIO ranges handled:
1: 0.c000.gpios GPIOS [221 - 256] PINS [0 - 35]
Advice, please.
> [..]
> > +
> > +static const struct of_device_id pmic_gpio_of_match[] = {
> > + { .compatible = "qcom,spmi-pmic-gpio" },
>
> I think this should be more specific, because hopefully the spmi specification
> will outlive the current pmic gpio block.
>
> So I think you need to list the pmic blocks here (e.g. "qcom,pm8941-gpio").
I can rename this to lovely "qcom,qpnp-gpio" :-), in this way driver
can outlive bus on which device is connected this time.
Regards,
Ivan
--
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
