On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 9:08 AM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sun, May 1, 2022 at 11:41 PM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > (...)
> > > +static struct gpiod_lookup_table hx4700_audio_gpio_table = {
> > > + .dev_id = "hx4700-audio",
> > > + .table = {
> > > + GPIO_LOOKUP("gpio-pxa", GPIO75_HX4700_EARPHONE_nDET,
> > > + "earphone-ndet", GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH),
> >
> > This looks wrong. The n in nDET in the end of the name of the GPIO line
> > means active low does it not?
> >
> > What I usually do when I see this is to properly set it to
> > GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW in the descriptor table, then invert the logic
> > where it's getting used.
> >
> > Also rename to earphone-det instead of -ndet
>
> Thanks for taking a look! I changed it now, but I don't know if
> I got the correct number of inversions in the end. How does this look?
Looks wrong, you can just invert the argument to any statement of set_value()
after tagging respective line as active low. Then gpilob will do a second
inversion.
> + GPIO_LOOKUP("gpio-pxa", GPIO75_HX4700_EARPHONE_nDET,
> + "earphone-det", GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW),
> + GPIO_LOOKUP("gpio-pxa", GPIO107_HX4700_SPK_nSD,
> + "spk-sd", GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW),
So those two have switched polarity.
> @@ -81,14 +79,14 @@ static const struct snd_soc_ops hx4700_ops = {
> static int hx4700_spk_power(struct snd_soc_dapm_widget *w,
> struct snd_kcontrol *k, int event)
> {
> - gpio_set_value(GPIO107_HX4700_SPK_nSD, !!SND_SOC_DAPM_EVENT_ON(event));
> + gpiod_set_value(gpiod_spk_sd, !!SND_SOC_DAPM_EVENT_ON(event));
Thus drop one ! in front of the expression, just !SND_SOC_DAPM_EVENT_ON(event)
> - gpio_set_value(GPIO92_HX4700_HP_DRIVER, !!SND_SOC_DAPM_EVENT_ON(event));
> + gpiod_set_value(gpiod_hp_driver, !!SND_SOC_DAPM_EVENT_ON(event));
But not this.
> + gpiod_spk_sd = devm_gpiod_get(&pdev->dev, "spk-sd", GPIOD_OUT_LOW);
These initial values don't seem to be set in the old code you could
just use GPIOD_ASIS as flag to make sure the new code behaves
the same.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
