On 21/09/17 12:56, Alexander Shiyan wrote: >> Четверг, 21 сентября 2017, 14:23 +03:00 от Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx>: >> >> I really need Alexander Shiyan to look at this patch. >> >> The way i percieve it, .set is NULL if the chip does not >> support output. >> >> We should print the right error messages and bail out >> if the user is anyway trying to set a line like that. > > Hello. > > Using "chip->set", instead of "priv->data->set", is more proper way on my opinion. > However, if the driver is not configured for output, the any errors should not occur in any case. So what is conclusion on this? I agree that there is nothing broken atm, but I faced the issues when I tried to use gpio-syscon to fit into my case which is very similar to those pseudo-GPIOs in drivers/mfd/vexpress-sysreg.c Thanks Vladimir > >> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 4:50 PM, Vladimir Murzin >> < vladimir.murzin@xxxxxxx > wrote: >> >>> "set" callback is optional and can be NULL, instead use chip->set >>> which always points at proper callback function. >>> >>> Fixes 2c341d62eb4b ("gpio: syscon: add soc specific callback to assign output value") >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Murzin < vladimir.murzin@xxxxxxx > >>> --- >>> drivers/gpio/gpio-syscon.c | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-syscon.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-syscon.c >>> index 537cec7..cf88a0b 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-syscon.c >>> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-syscon.c >>> @@ -122,7 +122,7 @@ static int syscon_gpio_dir_out(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned offset, int val) >>> BIT(offs % SYSCON_REG_BITS)); >>> } >>> >>> - priv->data->set(chip, offset, val); >>> + chip->set(chip, offset, val); >>> >>> return 0; >>> } > > --- > -- 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