On 2015-04-15 16:33, Rafał Miłecki wrote: > On 15 April 2015 at 15:07, Felix Fietkau <nbd@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> @@ -235,16 +235,17 @@ int bcma_gpio_init(struct bcma_drv_cc *cc) >> } >> >> /* >> - * On MIPS we register GPIO devices (LEDs, buttons) using absolute GPIO >> - * pin numbers. We don't have Device Tree there and we can't really use >> - * relative (per chip) numbers. >> - * So let's use predictable base for BCM47XX and "random" for all other. >> + * Register SoC GPIO devices with absolute GPIO pin base. >> + * On MIPS, we don't have Device Tree and we can't use relative (per chip) >> + * GPIO numbers. >> + * On some ARM devices, user space may want to access some system GPIO >> + * pins directly, which is easier to do with a predictable GPIO base. >> */ >> -#if IS_BUILTIN(CONFIG_BCM47XX) >> - chip->base = bus->num * BCMA_GPIO_MAX_PINS; >> -#else >> - chip->base = -1; >> -#endif >> + if (IS_BUILTIN(CONFIG_BCM47XX) || >> + cc->core->bus->hosttype == BCMA_HOSTTYPE_SOC) >> + chip->base = bus->num * BCMA_GPIO_MAX_PINS; >> + else >> + chip->base = -1; > > Is there any chance you will need predictable GPIO numbers of extra > bcma buses on ARM? Like accessing GPIO of PCIe card from user space? > Then you could prefer IS_BUILTIN(CONFIG_ARCH_BCM_5301X) > > Anyway, I'm OK with this patch. I don't think I need it, and I didn't want this change to produce conflicts on multi-arch builds, so I limited it to the SoC bus only. - Felix -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
