On Thu Feb 13, 2025 at 8:47 PM CET, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 02:45:31PM +0100, Mathieu Dubois-Briand wrote: > > On Thu Feb 13, 2025 at 11:59 AM CET, Mathieu Dubois-Briand wrote: > > > On Wed Feb 12, 2025 at 5:17 PM CET, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 05:08:56PM +0100, Mathieu Dubois-Briand wrote: > > > > > On Wed Feb 12, 2025 at 4:14 PM CET, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 01:57:34PM +0100, Mathieu Dubois-Briand wrote: > > > > > > > On Mon Jan 27, 2025 at 2:07 PM CET, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 01:42:28PM +0100, Mathieu Dubois-Briand wrote: > > ... > > > > > > > > > > + if (of_property_read_u32(pdev->dev.of_node, "ngpios", &ngpios)) { > > > > > > > > > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Missing ngpios OF property\n"); > > > > > > > > > + return -ENODEV; > > > > > > > > > + } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is not needed, it is already done in GPIOLIB core. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I believe this is still needed: > > > > > > > - For gpos, we need the gpio count to correctly set the partition > > > > > > > between gpo and keypad columns in max7360_set_gpos_count(). > > > > > > > > > > > > Shouldn't be that done somewhere in the GPIO valid mask initialisation? > > > > > > > > > > > > > - For gpios, we need the gpio count to setup the IRQs. > > > > > > > > > > > > Doesn't GPIOLIB parse the property before initializing the IRQ valid mask > > > > > > and other init callbacks? > > > > > > > > > > No, I believe I have to register the IRQ before registering the GPIO, so > > > > > I can get the IRQ domain. > > > > > > > > > > Right now I have something like: > > > > > > > > > > irq_chip->num_irqs = ngpios; > > > > > devm_regmap_add_irq_chip_fwnode(dev, dev_fwnode(dev), max7360_gpio->regmap, > > > > > irq, flags, 0, irq_chip, &irq_chip_data); > > > > > gpio_config.irq_domain = regmap_irq_get_domain(irq_chip_data); > > > > > devm_gpio_regmap_register(dev, &gpio_config); > > > > > > > > > > Also, gpiolib will store ngpios in the gpio_chip structure, but while > > > > > using gpio-regmap, this structure is masked behind the opaque > > > > > gpio_regmap structure. So I believe there is no easy way to retrieve its > > > > > value. > > Would it be needed in your driver ->probe() after all? (See also below) > No necessarily in the probe with the changes previously described, but I will need it in other functions. So either I get it in the probe and store it, or I will need to retrieve it by other means. > > > > > This part of the code changed a lot, maybe it would be easier if I push > > > > > a new version of the series and we continue the discussion there? > > > > > > > > So, what seems need to be added is some flag to GPIO regmap configuration > > > > data structure and a code that is called after gpiochip_add_data() in > > > > gpio_regmap_register() to create a domain. This will solve the above issue > > > > and helps other drivers to get rid of potential duplication of > > > > devm_regmap_add_irq_chip_fwnode() calls. > > > > > > > > Have you researched this path? > > > > > > OK, so looking at the code, I believe it would need to: > > > - Add some flag in gpio_regmap_config structure, so > > > gpio_regmap_register() creates a new IRQ domain. > > Easy. > > > > - Add a function allowing to retrieve this domain out of the gpio_regmap > > > structure. > > Easy, as there is an API available for regmaps, so it looks like one-liner. > > > > - Allow to pass a domain in the regmap_irq_chip structure, so > > > regmap_add_irq_chip_fwnode() use this domain instead of calling > > > regmap_irq_create_domain(). > > You need this because of...? (Please, remind me what the obstacle is there > that requires this to be done) > OK, maybe I misunderstood you idea. Or maybe I misunderstood something about IRQ domains. So what I understood is, in the probe, we first call gpio_regmap_register(), that will create a new IRQ domain, and we call regmap_add_irq_chip_fwnode() in second. But this second call will again create an IRQ domain, so we would end-up with a second one. We have to prevent this second creation and make it use the one we created first. Did I miss something? > > > - Make sure this domain is still populated with the IRQ data: number of > > > IRQs, IRQ base but also a pointer on the regmap_irq_chip_data > > > structure in .host_data. I believe this will be a bit tricky. > > Hmm... But wouldn't gpio-regmap internals have all this information available? > I don't think so. It will not know the IRQ base nor the regmap_irq_chip_data as it is not created at this point. > > > - Add a function allowing to retrieve ngpio out of the > > > gpio_regmap.gpio_chip structure, so it can be used for IRQ setup and > > > other places of the driver. > > I'm not sure where it can be needed. > Let's discuss this on the next version, but yes, I do need to know ngpio in the driver. > > > I'm sorry, but I feel like this is a lot of changes to solve this point. > > > I've been thinking about it, and I can suggest a different solution. > > > > > > For gpios, I will remove the ngpios property of the device tree and use > > > a fixed value: > > > - For the today version of the chip, this is always 8. > > > - I a chip variant or a similar chip ever arise later with a different > > > number of gpios, the fixed value can be set according to the > > > "compatible" value. > > > - This removes any issue with the IRQ setup. > > > > > > For gpos, we have to keep ngpios, as it depends of the implementation on > > > the board. That means ngpios will be used: > > > - For the gpio chip configuration: we let gpiolib retrieve it from the > > > device tree. > > > - In gpio-regmap reg_mask_xlate callback: I can add a function allowing > > > to retrieve it from gpio_regmap.gpio_chip, as suggested above. > > > - In max7360_set_gpos_count() to validate the coherency between > > > requested gpios and keypad columns and set the correct configuration > > > on the chip: > > > - I can also retrieve the value from gpio_regmap.gpio_chip, but that > > > means the check is made after the call to > > > devm_gpio_regmap_register(). > > > - Or I will still need to retrieve it using device_property_read_u32() > > > here. > > > > > > How do you feel about this solution? > > > > Actually there is an additional issue: today, relying on gpiolib to > > parse the "ngpios" property does not work with gpio-regmap. > > > > The gpiochip_get_ngpios() function in gpiolib is called in > > gpiochip_add_data_with_key(), but when using gpio_regmap_register(), > > we first ensure ngpio is set correctly before calling anything. > > > > Yet I believe this check can safely be removed, allowing the magic in > > gpiolib happen as expected. > > Not really. I'm about to send a series to address this issue. > Please, test. I will test it today. > > ... > > P.S. > Maybe it's time to send a new version based on this discussion even > if not finished / working, so we can see the exact issues we still have > and target them. Sure, I will send a new version, probably today. Thanks again for your help. -- Mathieu Dubois-Briand, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com