On 10/16/2017 03:01 AM, Thierry Reding wrote:
This is the bit that I don't understand. If you only tell gpiolib about
the GPIOs that exist, then it won't be initializing the .irq_valid_mask
in a wrong way.
I know, and that's what my patches do. I tell gpiolib that I need a
valid mask:
/* If the GPIO map is sparse, then we need to disable specific IRQs */
chip->irq_need_valid_mask = pctrl->soc->sparse;
Then I proceed to provide the specific GPIOs that exist, one block at a
time:
ret = gpiochip_add_pin_range(&pctrl->chip,
dev_name(pctrl->dev),
start, start, count);
In other words, what I'm trying to say is that in your case, ngpio isn't
equal to the sum of .npins over all groups.
That's true. I set it to the maximum number of GPIOs that exist on the
chip. I could set it to the highest number of GPIOs that I register
(e.g. the highest value of "start + count"), but that's not necessary
for my patches to work.
If instead you make the chip
register only the lines that actually exist, .irq_valid_mask will only
contain bits that do exist.
That's what I'm doing.
The reason I'm bringing this up is because we had the same discussion
back in November last year (yes, that driver still isn't upstream...):
https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/11/22/543
In a nutshell: the Tegra driver was assuming that each port had a fixed
number (8) of lines, but when gpiolib changed to query the direction of
GPIOs at driver probe time this broke badly because on of the instances
of the GPIO controller is very strict about what it allows access to.
It appear we're re-hashing that same exact argument.
This seems to be similar to what you're experiencing. In our case we'd
run into a hard hang trying to access a register for a non-existing
GPIO. One of the possibilities discussed in the thread was to introduce
something akin to what's being proposed here.
I guess great minds do think alike!
In the end it turned out to be easiest to just don't tell gpiolib about
any non-existing GPIOs, because then you don't get to deal with any of
these workarounds.
I agree.
The downside is that you need a little more code to
find out exactly what GPIO you're talking about, or to determine how
many you have.
In my case, the ACPI table provides an exact list that I use at probe()
time.
In the end I think it's all worth it by making it a lot
easier in general to deal with. I think it's really confusing if you
expose, say, 200 pins, and for 50 of them users will get -EACCES, or
-ENOENT or whatever if they try to use them.
True, but /sys/kernel/debug/gpio is the only mechanism I found where the
user can get a list of valid GPIOs. Maybe we need something similar in
/sys/class/gpio/.
--
Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm
Technologies, Inc. Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the
Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
