On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 2:58 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 3:44 PM, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 6:23 PM, Charles Keepax >> <ckeepax@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 03:37:37PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: >>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 2:27 PM, Charles Keepax >>>> <ckeepax@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> >>>> > If we request a GPIO hog, then gpiochip_add_data will attempt to request >>>> > some of its own GPIOs. The driver also uses gpiochip_generic_request >>>> > which means that for any GPIO request to succeed the pinctrl needs to be >>>> > registered. Currently however the driver registers the GPIO and then the >>>> > pinctrl meaning all GPIO hog requests will fail, which then in turn causes >>>> > the whole driver to fail probe. Fix this up by ensuring we register the >>>> > pinctrl first. Although currently there are no users of GPIO hogs in >>>> > mainline there are plenty of Samsung based boards that are widely used >>>> > for development purposes of other hardware. Indeed we hit this issue >>>> > whilst attaching some additional hardware to an Arndale system. >>>> > >>>> > Signed-off-by: Charles Keepax <ckeepax@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> > Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>> > --- >>>> > >>>> > Changes since v1: >>>> > - Updated commit message >>>> >>>> Patch applied. Will not be visible in -next until after the merge window >>>> though. >>>> >>> >>> Apologies but I think you might be best to drop this patch for >>> now, it seems this causes the ranges passed to >>> pinctrl_add_gpio_range to have the wrong .base, whilst I can >>> actually see no ill effects from this on Arndale. I suspect this >>> patch may be only part of the solution and may potentially cause >>> issues for others even though it seems fine for me. >> >> OK I dropped it. >> >> Resend it if you figure it out. >> >> The Samsung driver traffic is increasing, and there are now >> a bunch of developers starting to step on each others' toes. >> >> Would you Samsung developers start considering someone who >> can collect Samsung pin control patches and send them as >> pull requests to me? > > For some reason, some days ago I had impression that Sylwester is > doing this already... but I was corrected that you are taking them > directly. If Tomasz and Sylwester are willing to do this, they got my > Ack. > > If not, I can take it and set a separate repo on my kernel.org account. That would be great, if there will be a lot of Samsung pin control work for this kernel cycle. Yours, Linus Walleij -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 |