Hi, On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 1:35 PM Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 8:02 AM Sergio Paracuellos > <sergio.paracuellos@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 9:04 AM Sergio Paracuellos > > <sergio.paracuellos@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > There are some unfortunate cases where the DT representation > > > of the device and the Linux internal representation differs. > > > Such drivers for devices are forced to implement a custom function > > > to avoid the core code 'devprop_gpiochip_set_names' to be executed > > > since in any other case every gpiochip inside will got repeated > > > names through its internal gpiochip banks. To avoid this antipattern > > > this changes are introduced trying to adapt core 'devprop_gpiochip_set_names' > > > to get a correct behaviour for every single situation. > > > > > > This series introduces a new 'offset' field in the gpiochip structure > > > that can be used for those unfortunate drivers that must define multiple > > > gpiochips per device. > > > > > > Drivers affected by this situation are also updated. These are > > > 'gpio-mt7621' and 'gpio-brcmstb'. > > > > > > Motivation for this series available at [0]. > > > > > > Thanks in advance for your feedback. > > > > > > Best regards, > > > Sergio Paracuellos > > > > > > [0]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2021/6/26/198 > > > > > > Sergio Paracuellos (3): > > > gpiolib: convert 'devprop_gpiochip_set_names' to support multiple > > > gpiochip baks per device > > > gpio: mt7621: support gpio-line-names property > > > gpio: brcmstb: remove custom 'brcmstb_gpio_set_names' > > > > > > drivers/gpio/gpio-brcmstb.c | 45 +------------------------------------ > > > drivers/gpio/gpio-mt7621.c | 1 + > > > drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++----- > > > include/linux/gpio/driver.h | 4 ++++ > > > 4 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-) > > > > Hi! > > > > Linus, Bartosz, any comments on this series? > > > > Looks good, but I was thinking you were going to address Gregory's > points first and resend a v2? I was waiting for your opinion about the last warning stuff Gregory commented on PATCH 1 since it is not a good way to distinguish between normal (1 gpiochip) and special cases (multiple gpiochips). I think since that can happen normally we can just remove the warning. With that clear I properly fix it up and resend v2. > > Bartosz Best regards, Sergio Paracuellos