Hi Andy, On Fri, Jul 2, 2021 at 11:27 AM Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 27, 2021 at 4:13 PM Sergio Paracuellos > <sergio.paracuellos@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 27, 2021 at 3:01 PM Andy Shevchenko > > <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Sun, Jun 27, 2021 at 1:56 PM Sergio Paracuellos > > > <sergio.paracuellos@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Sun, Jun 27, 2021 at 12:51 PM Andy Shevchenko > > > > <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Jun 27, 2021 at 12:47 PM Sergio Paracuellos > > > > > <sergio.paracuellos@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On Sun, Jun 27, 2021 at 11:33 AM Andy Shevchenko > > > > > > <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 26, 2021 at 7:18 PM Sergio Paracuellos > > > > > > > <sergio.paracuellos@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The default handling of the gpio-line-names property by the > > > > > > > > gpiolib-of implementation does not work with the multiple > > > > > > > > gpiochip banks per device structure used by the gpio-mt7621 > > > > > > > > driver. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This commit adds driver level support for the device tree > > > > > > > > property so that GPIO lines can be assigned friendly names. > > > > > > > > > > > > > This driver has three gpiochips with 32 gpios each. Core implementation > > > > > > > > > > > > > > implementation > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > got gpio's repeated along each gpio chip if chip.names is not assigned. > > > > > > > > To avoid this behaviour driver will set this names as empty or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the driver > > > > > > > these names > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with desired friendly line names. Consider the following sample with > > > > > > > > minimal entries for the first chip with this patch changes applied: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The same comment as per v1: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Any idea why it's not a duplicate of > > > > > > > https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.13-rc7/C/ident/devprop_gpiochip_set_names, > > > > > > > and why the latter is not called in your case? > > > > > > > > > > > > The core properly calls this function but not in the way expected. > > > > > > This driver implements three banks of 32 gpios each internally using > > > > > > one gpiochip per bank, all of them in the same device. So the core > > > > > > code you are pointing out here duplicates the same names along the > > > > > > three gpiochips which is not the expected behaviour. So implementing > > > > > > in this way and setting names at least reserved avoids the core code > > > > > > to be run and also avoids the duplication getting expected behaviour > > > > > > for all the banks and each line friendly name. > > > > > > > > > > Isn't it the problem of how we supply fwnode in that case? > > > > > Another possibility is to fix DT (although I'm not sure it's now possible). > > > > > > > > Since the fwnode is the same for all banks of the same device, each bank > > > > repeats the first MTK_BANK_WIDTH label names in each bank. > > > > > > Can you point out the DT in question? > > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gregkh/staging.git/tree/drivers/staging/mt7621-dts/mt7621.dtsi?h=staging-next > > > > Gpio node: > > > > gpio: gpio@600 { > > #gpio-cells = <2>; > > #interrupt-cells = <2>; > > compatible = "mediatek,mt7621-gpio"; > > gpio-controller; > > gpio-ranges = <&pinctrl 0 0 95>; > > interrupt-controller; > > reg = <0x600 0x100>; > > interrupt-parent = <&gic>; > > interrupts = <GIC_SHARED 12 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; > > }; > > > > My overlay: > > > > &gpio { > > gpio-line-names = "", "", "", "", > > "", "", "SFP LOS", "extcon port5 PoE compat", > > "SFP module def0", "LED blue SFP", "SFP tx disable", "", > > "switch USB power", "mode", "", "buzzer", > > "LED blue pwr", "switch port5 PoE out", "reset"; > > }; > > > > > > > > > > > > > This commit populates the gc.names member of each bank from the > > > > device-tree node within the driver. This overrides the default behavior > > > > since devprop_gpiochip_set_names() will only be called if names is NULL. > > > > > > I believe this commit is not needed in the proposed (i.e. duplication) shape. > > > The fwnode supports primary and secondary ones. Thus, we may create a > > > pair of fwnodes when they will unify properties per device with > > > properties per child together (child is primary and device, i.e. > > > parent, is secondary). > > > > There are no child nodes, all the stuff is in the same parent node > > and, as I said, belongs to the same device but internally uses three > > gpiochips. > > And it can't be split into three children in the overlay? Original code before this being mainlined was using three children and I was told in the review that three children were not allowed: See https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linux-gpio/patch/1527924610-13135-3-git-send-email-sergio.paracuellos@xxxxxxxxx/#1932827 > Let's assume it can't, then the GPIO library function should be > refactored in a way that it takes parameters like base index for the > names and tries to satisfy the caller. Bartosz, Linus, any thoughts on this? > > > This case is pretty much the same as the following already > > added commit for gpio-brcmstb: > > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gregkh/staging.git/commit/drivers/gpio/gpio-brcmstb.c?id=5eefcaed501dd9e3933dbff58720244bd75ed90f > > This should be fixed accordingly. Obviously, the treatment should be the same, yes :) Best regards, Sergio Paracuellos > > -- > With Best Regards, > Andy Shevchenko