On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 1:58 PM Martin Kaiser <martin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Thus wrote Saravana Kannan (saravanak@xxxxxxxxxx):
>
> > > With modules disabled, the kernel boots but probe fails for some
> > > (non-mainline) drivers in my tree.
>
> > Thanks Martin!
>
> > > All of those drivers have a gpio in
> > > their device-tree node, such as
>
> > > my_driver {
> > > gpio_test1 = <&gpio1 0 0>;
> > > ...
> > > };
>
> > > with gpio1 from arch/arm/boot/dts/imx25.dtsi.
>
> > > The probe function calls
>
> > > of_get_named_gpio(np, "gpio_test1", 0);
>
> > > to get the gpio. This fails with -EINVAL.
>
> > And you didn't see this issue with the fsl,avic patch?
>
> No. With the fsl,avic patch in place, all drivers are probed correctly.
>
> > The property you are using is not a standard GPIO binding (-gpios,
> > gpio, gpios) and I'm not surprised it's not working.
>
> I know that I should be using the gpiod API as suggested by Geert.
>
> BTW is this definition ok? Could its driver be converted to using the
> gpiod api?
>
> rtc: rtc {
> compatible = "moxa,moxart-rtc";
> gpio-rtc-sclk = <&gpio 5 0>;
> ...
The correct non-deprecated binding AFAIK is something-gpios. Not
gpio-something. And then you can use different APIs to get the GPIO (I
forget what it's called).
-Saravana
>
>
> > The gpio1 is probably getting probe deferred and ends up running after
> > "my_driver".
>
> I added a debug print in the probe function. It turned out that the
> driver for gpio1 is probed for the first time after my_driver.
>
> I removed the interrupt-controller property for gpio2 for testing. gpio2
> was then probed much earlier.
