On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 10:15:35AM +0200, Hawa, Hanna wrote: > On 12/14/2022 6:09 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: ... > > > + if (dev->dev->pins && dev->dev->pins->p) > > > + rinfo->pinctrl = dev->dev->pins->p; > > Hmm... I don't see how this field is being used. > > Can you elaborate? > > This field is used in i2c_generic_scl_recovery(), if it's not NULL then the > flow will set the state to GPIO before running the recovery mechanism. > if (bri->pinctrl) > pinctrl_select_state(bri->pinctrl, bri->pins_gpio); OK, but why that function doesn't use the dev->pins->p if it's defined? (As a fallback when rinfo->pinctrl is NULL.) Wolfram? Hanna, it seems you missed I²C maintainer to Cc... ... > I saw that that the change failed in complication for SPARC architecture, as > the pins field is wraparound with CONFIG_PINCTRL in device struct. I though > on two options to solve the compilation error, first by adding wraparound of > CONFIG_PINCTRL when accessing the pins field. And the second option is to > add get function in pinctrl/devinfo.h file, which return the pins field, or > NULL in case the PINCTRL is not defined. Which option you think we can go > with? Getter with a stub sounds better to me, so you won't access some device core fields. Linus, what do you think about all these (including previous paragraph)? -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
