On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 3:29 PM, Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 4:21 PM, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 11:52 PM, Andy Shevchenko >> <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> It reminds me how 12 channel PWM chip is used on Intel Galileo Gen 2. >>> Half pins are PWM, the other half is GPIO used for discrete based pin >>> muxing and control. Nevertheless I think it's a userspace issue for >>> now, otherwise we have to provide some 'semi-virtual' way of >>> presenting pins as GPIO lines. >> >> That sounds like an MFD spawning a GPIO and a PWM cell. >> That it is called "a PWM chip" is no big deal, it should be >> modeled according to what it is, not what it claims to be. > > Although I agree with model I barely imagine how in this case drivers > should access PWM chip registers in non-race way (take into account > that PWM itself is connected to i2c bus). There is a pattern for that. You add a set of accessor functions that performs the I2C traffic in the MFD layer. The accessor functions take a mutex. Since this is all slowpath, waiting/preempting in a mutex is perfectly fine for all subdrivers. Look at this: /** * stmpe_reg_write() - write a single STMPE register * @stmpe: Device to write to * @reg: Register to write * @val: Value to write */ int stmpe_reg_write(struct stmpe *stmpe, u8 reg, u8 val) { int ret; mutex_lock(&stmpe->lock); ret = __stmpe_reg_write(stmpe, reg, val); mutex_unlock(&stmpe->lock); return ret; } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(stmpe_reg_write); Yours, Linus Walleij -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html