Re: [PATCH 1/2] gpio: regmap: add request/free gpio_chip functions

[Álvaro Fernández Rojas <noltari@xxxxxxxxx>]

El mar, 7 ene 2025 a las 11:43, Jonas Gorski
(<jonas.gorski@xxxxxxxxx>) escribió:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Jan 7, 2025 at 11:27 AM Álvaro Fernández Rojas
> <noltari@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Allow configuring gpio_chip request/free functions when creating a gpio-regmap.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Álvaro Fernández Rojas <noltari@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpio/gpio-regmap.c  | 2 ++
> >  include/linux/gpio/regmap.h | 4 ++++
> >  2 files changed, 6 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-regmap.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-regmap.c
> > index 71684dee2ca5..32ec85b41653 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-regmap.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-regmap.c
> > @@ -261,6 +261,8 @@ struct gpio_regmap *gpio_regmap_register(const struct gpio_regmap_config *config
> >         chip->names = config->names;
> >         chip->label = config->label ?: dev_name(config->parent);
> >         chip->can_sleep = regmap_might_sleep(config->regmap);
> > +       chip->request = config->request;
> > +       chip->free = config->free;
>
> I wonder if you couldn't just use gpiochip_generic_request() /
> gpiochip_generic_free() unconditionally here. AFAIU, these don't do
> anything when there are no GPIO ranges defined (so should not
> interfere with non-pinctrl linked devices), as well as nothing when
> CONFIG_PINCTRL isn't enabled, so they should be NOPs if there is no
> pinctrl link, and do the right thing if there is one.
>
> Best Regards,
> Jonas

@Jonas Your proposal is now used in OpenWrt for realtek
https://github.com/openwrt/openwrt/blob/6ef6014887c393dc07f0349028d93e4fa82e0733/target/linux/realtek/patches-6.6/801-gpio-regmap-Use-generic-request-free-ops.patch,
so I guess that we could send that patch to linux-gpio instead.

@Sander can you send that patch to linux-gpio? We need it for bmips too:
https://github.com/openwrt/openwrt/pull/17487

Best regards,
Álvaro.