Hi!
> > > Without these patches the driver limits the number of pins exposed on
> > > the gpiochip to the number of pins specified as GPIO in the devicetree,
> > > but doesn't map between the GPIO and pin number spaces. The result is
> > > that specifying offset or interleaved GPIOs in the devicetree gives
> > > unexpected behaviour in userspace.
> > >
> > > By always exposing all pins as GPIOs the patches resolve the lack of
> > > mapping between GPIO offsets and pins on the package in the driver by
> > > ensuring we always have a 1-to-1 mapping.
> > >
> > > The issue is primarily addressed by patch 1/2. Patch 2/2 makes it
> > > possible to not expose any pins as LEDs (and therefore make them all
> > > accessible as GPIOs). This has a follow-on effect of allowing the driver
> > > to bind to a device instantiated at runtime without requiring a
> > > description in the devicetree.
> > >
> > > I've tested the series under qemu to inspect the various interactions
> > > between LEDs vs GPIOs as well as conflicting GPIO requests.
>
> > > Please review!
> >
> > This is simpler than the 'ngpio' business we had before.
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Cédric Le Goater <clg@xxxxxxxx>
>
> I saw that you recently merged some LED patches. I was wondering if
> you could consider this series for v5.18. It still applies cleanly,
> and we've been running it for a while now, so it's very well tested.
Thanks, applied. I must say this is really ninja-mutant driver, but I
see no better way.
+++ b/drivers/leds/leds-pca955x.c
@@ -429,7 +429,7 @@ pca955x_get_pdata(struct i2c_client *client, struct pca955x_chipdef *chip)
int count;
This really should be unsigned. Care to fix/submit a patch?
Best regards,
Pavel
--
http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
