Le 27/04/2023 à 12:46, Andy Shevchenko a écrit : > On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 1:37 PM Andreas Kemnade <andreas@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On Thu, 27 Apr 2023 06:20:34 +0000 >> Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> Le 27/04/2023 à 08:00, Andy Shevchenko a écrit : >>>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 8:40 AM Christophe Leroy >>>> <christophe.leroy@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Le 27/04/2023 à 00:03, Andreas Kemnade a écrit : >>>>>> [Vous ne recevez pas souvent de courriers de andreas@xxxxxxxxxxxx. Découvrez pourquoi ceci est important à https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] >>>>>> >>>>>> If static allocation and dynamic allocation GPIOs are present, >>>>>> dynamic allocation pollutes the numberspace for static allocation, >>>>>> causing static allocation to fail. >>>>>> Enfore dynamic allocation above GPIO_DYNAMIC_BASE. >>>>> >>>>> Hum .... >>>>> >>>>> Commit 7b61212f2a07 ("gpiolib: Get rid of ARCH_NR_GPIOS") was supposed >>>>> to enforce dynamic allocation above GPIO_DYNAMIC_BASE already. >>>>> >>>>> Can you describe what is going wrong exactly with the above commit ? >>>> >>>> Above commit only works to the first dynamic allocation, if you need >>>> more than one with static ones present it mistakenly will give you a >>>> base _below_ DYNAMIC_BASE. >>> >>> Ah right, that needs to be fixed. >>> >>>> >>>> However, this change is just PoC I proposed, the conditional and >>>> action should be slightly different to cover a corner case, when >>>> statically allocated chip overlaps the DYNAMIC_BASE, i.e. gdev->base < >>>> DYNAMIC_BASE, while gdev->base + gdev->ngpio >= DYNAMIC_BASE. >>>> >>> >>> Yes you are right, that's gdev->base + gdev->ngpio that should be checked. >>> >> and that not with simple continue or base might simply stay at DYNAMIC_BASE. >> >> I will send a v2 of this patch with refined logic. > > Actually it would be nice to integrate a warning (if we don't have it > yet) when adding a GPIO chip with a static allocation and which will > overlap the dynamic base. Can you add that into your v2? > At the time being we have a warning for all static allocations, allthough their has been some discussion about reverting it, see commit 502df79b8605 ("gpiolib: Warn on drivers still using static gpiobase allocation") Christophe
