Re: pinctrl-sx150x.c broken in 4.11

[Tony Lindgren <tony@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

* Nikita Yushchenko <nikita.yoush@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [170511 10:01]:
> >>> Hmm maybe yeah. I don't quite follow the above the "pinctrl-0 property
> >>> of sx150x device tree node, is misinterpreted as hog" part though.
> >>
> >> sx150x is i2c-gpio device.  It has 16 GPIO lines that are communicated
> >> with via i2c bus, and an interrupt line.
> >>
> >> Interrupt line is typically connected to SoC's pin.
> >> This pin has to be configured.
> >> This is done by providing appropriate subnode in SoC's pinmux node, with
> >> information with pin configuration, and pinctrl-0 property in sx150x's
> >> node with phandle to that subnode:
> >>
> >> ...
> >> &i2c0 {
> >> 	sx1503@20 {
> >> 		compatible = "semtech,sx1503q";
> >> 		pinctrl-names = "default";
> >> 		pinctrl-0 = <&pinctrl_sx1503_20>;
> >> 		...
> >> 	};
> >> };
> >> ...
> >> &iomuxc {
> >> 	pinctrl_sx1503_20: pinctrl-sx1503-20 {
> >> 		fsl,pins = <
> >> 			VF610_PAD_PTB1__GPIO_23         0x219d
> >> 		>;
> >> 	};
> >> };
> >>
> >> This pin configuration is handled by driver core, i.e. before probe()
> >> for sx150x is called, core applies pin configuration.
> >>
> >> However sx150x driver is currently implemented as a pinctrl driver.
> >>
> >> When it initializes, pinctrl searches for "hog", i.e. pin config that
> >> should be applied at driver registration time.
> >>
> >> While doing so, core searches for any registered pinctrl_map for device
> >> being register. Search loop is in create_pinctrl().
> >>
> >> In this case, this loop finds map that is defined above.
> >>
> >> This is *not* hog.  This is pin setting already applied in SoC's pinmux
> >> controller for sx1503 device.
> >>
> >> However code in create_pinctrl() tries to apply it, and use sx1503's
> >> methods to do so. Which is plain wrong and errors out.
> > 
> > Maybe create_pinctrl() could check if the pin controller device
> > for a potential hog points to the device itself and bail out
> > if that's not the case?
> 
> Well that's exactly what patch from my first mail in this thread does.
> This indeed fixes my case, but I don't know if it is correct in generic
> case.

OK, yeah I just looked it up as I was not in cc.

> Should I submit it? Do you ack?

Yeah please submit a proper patch. I assume you already checked
that this change only affects the pinctrl hogs only, not regular
device pins? I'd assume so as it's in create_pinctrl()..

Regards,

Tony
--
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