Hi Bart, On 9/27/23 12:44, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 11:40 AM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> On 9/26/23 16:59, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: >>> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> Instead of acpi_get_and_request_gpiod() + gpiod_toggle_active_low(), use >>> temporary lookup tables with appropriate lookup flags. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c | 12 ++++-------- >>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c >>> index bca1ce7d0d0c..62e0cd5207a7 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c >>> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c >>> @@ -25,18 +25,14 @@ int skl_int3472_register_pled(struct int3472_discrete_device *int3472, >>> if (int3472->pled.classdev.dev) >>> return -EBUSY; >>> >>> - int3472->pled.gpio = acpi_get_and_request_gpiod(path, agpio->pin_table[0], >>> - "int3472,privacy-led"); >>> + int3472->pled.gpio = skl_int3472_gpiod_get_from_temp_lookup( >>> + int3472->dev, path, agpio->pin_table[0], >>> + "int3472,privacy-led", polarity, >>> + GPIOD_OUT_LOW); >> >> Yeah so this is not going to work, path here is an ACPI device path, e.g. >> on my laptop (which actually uses the INT3472 glue code) the path-s of >> the 2 GPIO controllers are: `\_SB_.GPI0` resp `\_SB_.PC00.XHCI.RHUB.HS08.VGPO` >> >> Where as skl_int3472_gpiod_get_from_temp_lookup() stores the passed in path >> in gpiod_lookup_table.table[0].key, which is the dev_name() of the GPIO >> controller's parent dev which are `INTC1055:00` resp. `INTC1096:00` . >> >> So we are going to need to add some code to INT3472 to go from path to >> a correct value for gpiod_lookup_table.table[0].key which means partly >> reproducing most of acpi_get_gpiod: >> >> struct gpio_chip *chip; >> acpi_handle handle; >> acpi_status status; >> >> status = acpi_get_handle(NULL, path, &handle); >> if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) >> return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV); >> >> chip = gpiochip_find(handle, acpi_gpiochip_find); >> if (!chip) >> return ERR_PTR(-EPROBE_DEFER); >> >> And then get the key from the chip. Which means using gpiochip_find >> in the int3472 code now, which does not sound like an improvement. >> >> I think that was is needed instead is adding an active_low flag >> to acpi_get_and_request_gpiod() and then have that directly >> set the active-low flag on the returned desc. >> > > Ultimately I'd like everyone to use gpiod_get() for getting > descriptors but for now I get it's enough. Are you find with this > being done in a single patch across GPIO and this driver? Yes doing this in a single patch is fine. Also I'm fine with merging such a patch through the gpio tree . Regards, Hans >>> if (IS_ERR(int3472->pled.gpio)) >>> return dev_err_probe(int3472->dev, PTR_ERR(int3472->pled.gpio), >>> "getting privacy LED GPIO\n"); >>> >>> - if (polarity == GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW) >>> - gpiod_toggle_active_low(int3472->pled.gpio); >>> - >>> - /* Ensure the pin is in output mode and non-active state */ >>> - gpiod_direction_output(int3472->pled.gpio, 0); >>> - >>> /* Generate the name, replacing the ':' in the ACPI devname with '_' */ >>> snprintf(int3472->pled.name, sizeof(int3472->pled.name), >>> "%s::privacy_led", acpi_dev_name(int3472->sensor)); >> >
