Hi Sergio, On Thu, Jul 08, 2021 at 09:04:27AM +0200, Sergio Paracuellos wrote: > The default gpiolib-of implementation does not work with the multiple > gpiochip banks per device structure used for example by the gpio-mt7621 > and gpio-brcmstb drivers. To fix these kind of situations driver code > is forced to fill the names to avoid the gpiolib code to set names > repeated along the banks. Instead of continue with that antipattern > fix the gpiolib core function to get expected behaviour for every > single situation adding a field 'offset' in the gpiochip structure. > Doing in this way, we can assume this offset will be zero for normal > driver code where only one gpiochip bank per device is used but > can be set explicitly in those drivers that really need more than > one gpiochip. This is a nice improvement, thanks for putting this together! A few remarks below: > > Signed-off-by: Sergio Paracuellos <sergio.paracuellos@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ > include/linux/gpio/driver.h | 4 ++++ > 2 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c > index 27c07108496d..f3f45b804542 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c > @@ -382,11 +382,16 @@ static int devprop_gpiochip_set_names(struct gpio_chip *chip) > if (count < 0) > return 0; > > - if (count > gdev->ngpio) { > - dev_warn(&gdev->dev, "gpio-line-names is length %d but should be at most length %d", > - count, gdev->ngpio); > - count = gdev->ngpio; > - } > + /* > + * When offset is set in the driver side we assume the driver internally > + * is using more than one gpiochip per the same device. We have to stop > + * setting friendly names if the specified ones with 'gpio-line-names' > + * are less than the offset in the device itself. This means all the > + * lines are not present for every single pin within all the internal > + * gpiochips. > + */ > + if (count <= chip->offset) > + return 0; This case needs a descriptive warning message. Silent failure to assign names here will leave someone confused about what they're doing wrong. > > names = kcalloc(count, sizeof(*names), GFP_KERNEL); > if (!names) > @@ -400,8 +405,25 @@ static int devprop_gpiochip_set_names(struct gpio_chip *chip) > return ret; > } > > + /* > + * When more that one gpiochip per device is used, 'count' can > + * contain at most number gpiochips x chip->ngpio. We have to > + * correctly distribute all defined lines taking into account > + * chip->offset as starting point from where we will assign > + * the names to pins from the 'names' array. Since property > + * 'gpio-line-names' cannot contains gaps, we have to be sure > + * we only assign those pins that really exists since chip->ngpio > + * can be different of the chip->offset. > + */ > + count = (count > chip->offset) ? count - chip->offset : count; > + if (count > chip->ngpio) { In the multiple gpiochip case, if there are 3+ gpiochips this seems like it will yield an invalid warning. For example, if there are 3 gpiochips (banks 0, 1, and 2), and all gpios are given names in gpio-line-names, isn't this condition going to always evaluate to true for bank 1, resulting in an invalid warning? In that case I would think setting count to chip->ngpio is the *expected* behavior. Since that's a "normal" behavior in the multiple gpiochip case, I'm not sure there's a simple way to detect an over-long gpio-line-names here in this function anymore. > + dev_warn(&gdev->dev, "gpio-line-names is length %d but > should be at most length %d", + count, > chip->ngpio); > + count = chip->ngpio; + } + for (i = 0; i < count; i++) > - gdev->descs[i].name = names[i]; + > gdev->descs[i].name = names[chip->offset + i]; > > kfree(names); > > [snip] Best regards, Gregory