Hi,
This patch series fix 2 issue on at91
first the gpio are not mux to gpio shen requested and free
second on the sam9x5 series we ma not have 32 pins routed on each bank
The following changes since commit 84a1caf1453c3d44050bd22db958af4a7f99315c:
Linux 3.5-rc7 (2012-07-14 15:40:28 -0700)
are available in the git repository at:
git://github.com/at91linux/linux-at91.git tags/at91-for-3.5-gpio-fix
for you to fetch changes up to 8b8d117749961ec387e7a3b1ecc29eb24c73ca9c:
arm: at91: at91sam9x5: fix gpio number per bank (2012-07-15 20:46:06 +0800)
----------------------------------------------------------------
arm: at91: gpio fixes
This patch series fix 2 issue on at91
first the gpio are not mux to gpio shen requested and free
second on the sam9x5 series we ma not have 32 pins routed on each bank
Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <redacted>
----------------------------------------------------------------
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD (4):
ARM: at91: gpio: implement request
ARM: at91: gpio: implement gpio_free
at91: regroup gpio and pinctrl under a simple-bus
arm: at91: at91sam9x5: fix gpio number per bank
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio_atmel.txt | 5 +++++
arch/arm/boot/dts/at91sam9260.dtsi | 56 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
arch/arm/boot/dts/at91sam9263.dtsi | 98 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------------------------
arch/arm/boot/dts/at91sam9g45.dtsi | 87 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------------------------
arch/arm/boot/dts/at91sam9n12.dtsi | 79 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------------------
arch/arm/boot/dts/at91sam9x5.dtsi | 75 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------------
arch/arm/mach-at91/gpio.c | 52 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
7 files changed, 271 insertions(+), 181 deletions(-)
Best Regards,
J.
confire the pin as pio when requested
Cc: Nicolas Ferre <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <redacted>
---
arch/arm/mach-at91/gpio.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
configure a gpio as input when freeing it to reduce power consumption
Cc: Nicolas Ferre <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <redacted>
---
arch/arm/mach-at91/gpio.c | 7 ++++++-
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
On the serie 5 bank b and d have 19 and 22 pins only.
Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <redacted>
---
.../devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio_atmel.txt | 5 +++
arch/arm/boot/dts/at91sam9x5.dtsi | 2 ++
arch/arm/mach-at91/gpio.c | 33 +++++++++++++-------
3 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
@@ -9,6 +9,10 @@ Required properties: unused). - gpio-controller: Marks the device node as a GPIO controller.+optional properties:+- gpio-nb: Number of gpio if absent 32.++ Example: pioA: gpio at fffff200 { compatible = "atmel,at91rm9200-gpio";
From: Olof Johansson <hidden> Date: 2012-07-18 03:54:31
Hi Jean-Christophe,
Comments below. As I mentioned in the SPEAr pull request just now, we
are very close to final 3.5, so only fixes to bugs should go in.
Please help me out a bit below.
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 6:16 AM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
[off-list ref] wrote:
Are the two above regressions, or just general improvement? Looks like
the latter to me?
at91: regroup gpio and pinctrl under a simple-bus
This looks like a cleanup patch to me. I'm also not sure that this is
appropriate use of a simple-bus. The patch seems to have been posted
for review the same day as you sent the pull request, and not cc:d to
devicetree-discuss.
arm: at91: at91sam9x5: fix gpio number per bank
Ok, this one I can believe is a proper fix.
So, please let me know if I should just cherry-pick in the last patch
and include that in the last 3.5 pull request, or if you want to
respin the branch. Also, if any of the other patches are truly 3.5
material, I'd like to hear a bit more motivation as to why.
Thanks!
-Olof
Hi Jean-Christophe,
Comments below. As I mentioned in the SPEAr pull request just now, we
are very close to final 3.5, so only fixes to bugs should go in.
Please help me out a bit below.
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 6:16 AM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
[off-list ref] wrote:
Are the two above regressions, or just general improvement? Looks like
the latter to me?
On non dt I agree but on DT the gpio are not mux in the kernel.
Today it work if the bootloader mux it as gpio so the kernel work onther wise BUG
and this is the case today
quoted
at91: regroup gpio and pinctrl under a simple-bus
This looks like a cleanup patch to me. I'm also not sure that this is
appropriate use of a simple-bus. The patch seems to have been posted
for review the same day as you sent the pull request, and not cc:d to
devicetree-discuss.
forget to cc the devicetree but on at91 the pintcrl and gpio use the same
registers so you must you the simple-bus
As I've a huge patch series that I'm finishing to fix after found this bug on
the gpio it really help to do not rebase it
Best Regards,
J.
From: Olof Johansson <hidden> Date: 2012-07-18 05:41:29
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 10:23 PM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
[off-list ref] wrote:
On 20:54 Tue 17 Jul , Olof Johansson wrote:
quoted
Hi Jean-Christophe,
Comments below. As I mentioned in the SPEAr pull request just now, we
are very close to final 3.5, so only fixes to bugs should go in.
Please help me out a bit below.
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 6:16 AM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
[off-list ref] wrote:
Are the two above regressions, or just general improvement? Looks like
the latter to me?
On non dt I agree but on DT the gpio are not mux in the kernel.
Today it work if the bootloader mux it as gpio so the kernel work onther wise BUG
and this is the case today
Ok, thanks -- that makes sense. Care to roll those two patches into
one and document that in the commit message?
quoted
quoted
at91: regroup gpio and pinctrl under a simple-bus
This looks like a cleanup patch to me. I'm also not sure that this is
appropriate use of a simple-bus. The patch seems to have been posted
for review the same day as you sent the pull request, and not cc:d to
devicetree-discuss.
forget to cc the devicetree but on at91 the pintcrl and gpio use the same
registers so you must you the simple-bus
As I've a huge patch series that I'm finishing to fix after found this bug on
the gpio it really help to do not rebase it
Defining the same device twice to have two drivers bind to it doesn't
seem like the right solution here. That patch needs an acked-by from
Rob Herring or Grant Likely before we pick it up. Existing device
trees don't include the pinctrl nodes, so this is 3.6 material as far
as I can tell.
-Olof
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 10:23 PM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On 20:54 Tue 17 Jul , Olof Johansson wrote:
quoted
Hi Jean-Christophe,
Comments below. As I mentioned in the SPEAr pull request just now, we
are very close to final 3.5, so only fixes to bugs should go in.
Please help me out a bit below.
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 6:16 AM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
[off-list ref] wrote:
Are the two above regressions, or just general improvement? Looks like
the latter to me?
On non dt I agree but on DT the gpio are not mux in the kernel.
Today it work if the bootloader mux it as gpio so the kernel work onther wise BUG
and this is the case today
Ok, thanks -- that makes sense. Care to roll those two patches into
one and document that in the commit message?
no so much honestly as you wish
quoted
quoted
quoted
at91: regroup gpio and pinctrl under a simple-bus
This looks like a cleanup patch to me. I'm also not sure that this is
appropriate use of a simple-bus. The patch seems to have been posted
for review the same day as you sent the pull request, and not cc:d to
devicetree-discuss.
forget to cc the devicetree but on at91 the pintcrl and gpio use the same
registers so you must you the simple-bus
As I've a huge patch series that I'm finishing to fix after found this bug on
the gpio it really help to do not rebase it
Defining the same device twice to have two drivers bind to it doesn't
seem like the right solution here. That patch needs an acked-by from
Rob Herring or Grant Likely before we pick it up. Existing device
trees don't include the pinctrl nodes, so this is 3.6 material as far
as I can tell.
that's why I'm rewriting the pinctrl and gpio as one driver only
but we need the simple bus to describe it as done on other SoC Imx as example
so Rob can we have the ack to avoid to re-write about 20 patches that touch
the dts of all the at91 socs
Best Regards,
J.
From: Olof Johansson <hidden> Date: 2012-07-18 15:38:49
Hi,
Two nits below.
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 03:40:37PM +0200, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
quoted hunk
On the serie 5 bank b and d have 19 and 22 pins only.
Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <redacted>
---
.../devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio_atmel.txt | 5 +++
arch/arm/boot/dts/at91sam9x5.dtsi | 2 ++
arch/arm/mach-at91/gpio.c | 33 +++++++++++++-------
3 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
@@ -9,6 +9,10 @@ Required properties: unused). - gpio-controller: Marks the device node as a GPIO controller.+optional properties:+- gpio-nb: Number of gpio if absent 32.
From: Olof Johansson <hidden> Date: 2012-07-18 15:40:12
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 3:57 AM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
[off-list ref] wrote:
On 22:41 Tue 17 Jul , Olof Johansson wrote:
quoted
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 10:23 PM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On 20:54 Tue 17 Jul , Olof Johansson wrote:
quoted
Hi Jean-Christophe,
Comments below. As I mentioned in the SPEAr pull request just now, we
are very close to final 3.5, so only fixes to bugs should go in.
Please help me out a bit below.
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 6:16 AM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
[off-list ref] wrote:
Are the two above regressions, or just general improvement? Looks like
the latter to me?
On non dt I agree but on DT the gpio are not mux in the kernel.
Today it work if the bootloader mux it as gpio so the kernel work onther wise BUG
and this is the case today
Ok, thanks -- that makes sense. Care to roll those two patches into
one and document that in the commit message?
no so much honestly as you wish
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
at91: regroup gpio and pinctrl under a simple-bus
This looks like a cleanup patch to me. I'm also not sure that this is
appropriate use of a simple-bus. The patch seems to have been posted
for review the same day as you sent the pull request, and not cc:d to
devicetree-discuss.
forget to cc the devicetree but on at91 the pintcrl and gpio use the same
registers so you must you the simple-bus
As I've a huge patch series that I'm finishing to fix after found this bug on
the gpio it really help to do not rebase it
Defining the same device twice to have two drivers bind to it doesn't
seem like the right solution here. That patch needs an acked-by from
Rob Herring or Grant Likely before we pick it up. Existing device
trees don't include the pinctrl nodes, so this is 3.6 material as far
as I can tell.
that's why I'm rewriting the pinctrl and gpio as one driver only
but we need the simple bus to describe it as done on other SoC Imx as example
so Rob can we have the ack to avoid to re-write about 20 patches that touch
the dts of all the at91 socs
I'm sending in the last batch of fixes for 3.5 without this branch in
it. It's also getting too late to get them into 3.6 at this time since
the merge window is about to open and all code should already be in
arm-soc.
Jean-Christophe, when you've had a chance to clean up this branch and
get it ready for upstream merging, please mark the patches for stable
as appropriate to get them into 3.5.x.
-Olof
From: Nicolas Ferre <hidden> Date: 2012-08-07 12:47:01
On 07/15/2012 03:40 PM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD :
quoted hunk
configure a gpio as input when freeing it to reduce power consumption
Cc: Nicolas Ferre <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <redacted>
---
arch/arm/mach-at91/gpio.c | 7 ++++++-
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
From: Nicolas Ferre <hidden> Date: 2012-08-07 12:50:20
On 07/15/2012 03:40 PM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD :
Fix also the reg size as we have 512 bytes bank not 256 bytes per gpio/mux
controller
Definitively, there is not enough information about the purpose of this
patch: please elaborate a bit more the comment.
Moreover, it seems strange to change the device tree files without
introducing the pinctrl/pinmux driver (and the associated documentation)
at the same time...
So, no, not these changes now.
@@ -9,6 +9,10 @@ Required properties: unused). - gpio-controller: Marks the device node as a GPIO controller.+optional properties:+- gpio-nb: Number of gpio if absent 32.