On Thu, Jun 01, 2023 at 04:32:09PM +0200, Sascha Hauer wrote: > On Thu, Jun 01, 2023 at 04:25:06PM +0200, Marco Felsch wrote: > > This reverts commit 3641d381e63321016e3bf09504852a6b2a2f879b. > > > > Since the of_xlate support the gpio-hog support is broken because the > > 'gpio' property used to specify the gpio-hog pin does not contain any > > phandle. Due to the fact that of_xlate was never implemented the easiest > > way to fix the gpio-hog functionality is to revert the commit. > > 3641d381e63321016e3bf09504852a6b2a2f879b was introduced for sunxi. As > Jules is currently working on sunxi support this is likely needed soon, > so what's the second easiest way? I am not very familiar with the gpio-hog concept, what I understand is: "gpio-hog" are a description of gpios config to be initialized early on. The main difference with classic gpio is the omission of the phandle of the gpio controller (since gpio-hog are expected to be a child node of gpio controller). Correct me if I am wrong. In this case the current version of of_hog_gpio fails since it calls of_parse_phandle_with_args which expect the gpio to start with the controller phandle. My best guess would be to rework of_hog_gpio to not use of_parse_phandle_with_args and probably not gpio_of_xlate This sounds easier than a sync of barebox gpio code with linux. Cheers -- Jules
