Hi Neil,
Based on the current discussion results, GPIO index macro
definition does not belong to bindings. If so, the pinctrl driver keeps
the existing architecture, and use numbers instead in dts file. Or the
pinctrl driver use bank mode acess, this may not be compatible with
existing frameworks. This is done by adding of_xlate hook functions in
pinctrl_chip struct.
What is your advice that I can implement in the next version. Thanks!
On 2024/10/21 23:27, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
[ EXTERNAL EMAIL ]
On 21/10/2024 12:38, neil.armstrong@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
====><=================
+/* Standard port */
+#define GPIOB_START 0
+#define GPIOB_NUM 14
+
+#define GPIOD_START (GPIOB_START + GPIOB_NUM)
+#define GPIOD_NUM 16
+
+#define GPIOE_START (GPIOD_START + GPIOD_NUM)
+#define GPIOE_NUM 2
+
+#define GPIOT_START (GPIOE_START + GPIOE_NUM)
+#define GPIOT_NUM 23
+
+#define GPIOX_START (GPIOT_START + GPIOT_NUM)
+#define GPIOX_NUM 18
+
+#define PERIPHS_PIN_NUM (GPIOX_START + GPIOX_NUM)
+
+/* Aobus port */
+#define GPIOAO_START 0
+#define GPIOAO_NUM 7
+
+/* It's a special definition, put at the end, just 1 num */
+#define GPIO_TEST_N (GPIOAO_START + GPIOAO_NUM)
+#define AOBUS_PIN_NUM (GPIO_TEST_N + 1)
+
+#define AMLOGIC_GPIO(port, offset) (port##_START + (offset))
====><=================
is exactly what rob asked for, and you nacked it.
No, this is not what was asked, at least according to my understanding.
Number of GPIOs is not an ABI. Neither is their relationship, where one
starts and other ends.
I confirm this need some work, but it moved the per-pin define to start
and ranges, so what did rob expect ?
Maybe I missed something, but I could not find any users of these in the
DTS. Look:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241014-a4_pinctrl-v2-3-3e74a65c285e@xxxxxxxxxxx/
So you want consumers before the bindings ? strange argument
Where is any of above defines?
Maybe they will be visible in the consumer code, but I did not imagine
such use. You expect:
reset-gpios = <&ctrl GPIOAO_START 1>???
No I expect:
reset-gpios = <&ctrl AMLOGIC_GPIO(B, 0) 1>;
but the macro should go along the dts like we did for the reset defines,
so perhaps this is the solution ?
OK, so I said it was not a binding:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/u4afxqc3ludsic4n3hs3r3drg3ftmsbcwfjltic2mb66foo47x@xe57gltl77hq/
and you here confirm, if I understood you correctly, that it goes with
the DTS like reset defines (I assume non-ID like defines?), so also not
a binding?
What are we disagreeing with?
Just to recall, Jerome asked whether you have to now use arbitrary
numbers in DTS and my answer was: not. It's still the same answer.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
