Hi Javier,

On Tuesday 13 October 2015 00:19:20 Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:

On 10/12/2015 11:46 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:

quoted

* Laurent Pinchart [off-list ref] [151012 14:17]:

quoted

Hello,

While working on regulators, GPIOs and DT I noticed that many of our DT
source files incorrectly describe fixed regulators. The common error
patterns are

- Usage of the undefined (and never parsed) enable-active-low property
- Usage of the enable-active-high property without specifying an enable
  GPIO
- Typos in the enabl GPIO property name (gpios instead of gpio)
- Mismatch between the enable-active-high property (or the lack thereof)
  and the enable GPIO flags

This patch series fixes those issues in all the DT sources after locating
the errors using the following script.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
!/bin/sh

echo $1
cat $1 | awk '
BEGIN {
	open_drain = 0;
	active_high = 0;
	gpio = 0;
	flags = 0;
}

match($0, /([a-zA-Z0-9 at _-]*) {/, ary) {
	name = ary[1];
}

/compatible.*"regulator-fixed"/ {
	found = 1;
}

/enable-active-high/ {
	active_high = 1;
}

/gpio-open-drain/ {
	open_drain = 1;
}

match($0, /gpio += <.* ([^ ]*)>/, ary) {
	gpio = 1;
	flags = ary[1];
	if (flags == 0)
		flags = "GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH";
}

/}/ {
	if (found) {
		if (gpio) {
			print "\t" name ": active high " active_high " " flags " open 

drain "

quoted

quoted

			open_drain;
			if ((active_high && flags == "GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW") ||
			    (!active_high && flags == "GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH"))
				print "WARNING: enable-active-high and flags do not 

match"

quoted

quoted

		} else {
			if (active_high)
				print "WARNING: active high without GPIO"
			if (open_drain)
				print "WARNING: open drain without GPIO"
		}
	}
	
	gpio = 0;
	found = 0;
	active_high = 0;
	open_drain = 0;
	flags = 0;
}
'
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

All patches except for the ones touching omap3-beagle-xm and
omap3-overo-base are untested as I lack test hardware.

As there's no dependency between the patches touching different source
files the appropriate maintainers could take their share of the patches
in their tree. Alternatively I could send a single pull request after
collecting all acks but that might be more complex.

Nice clean-up. For omaps, there's an earlier patch posted by
Javier Martinez Canillas [off-list ref] as "[PATCH] ARM: dts:
Use defined GPIO constants in flags cell for OMAP2+ boards". Can you guys
do some cross checking and let me know which combination I should appluy
for omaps?

Since Laurent's changes for OMAP are part of a bigger series and my patch
was only for OMAP, probably makes sense for you to pick his patches and I
can re-spin mine on top of that.

BTW, I posted as a single patch since the changes were trivial but maybe
that made handling these conflicts harder and I should split the changes
instead, since I'll resend anyways.

What do you prefer? a patch per SoC family (i.e: OMAP{2,3,4,5}) or patch
per board DTS?

My series will likely miss the next merge window as more discussion is needed. 
I'll thus respin the patches on top of yours, please proceed without caring 
about this.

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart