Thread (15 messages) 15 messages, 3 authors, 2017-07-14

[PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: qcom: disable GPIO groups with no pins

From: Stephen Boyd <hidden>
Date: 2017-07-14 17:11:50
Also in: linux-arm-msm, linux-gpio

On 07/13, Timur Tabi wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-msm.c b/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-msm.c
index 273badd..e915db4 100644
--- a/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-msm.c
+++ b/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-msm.c
@@ -165,7 +165,22 @@ static int msm_pinmux_set_mux(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev,
 	return 0;
 }
 
+/*
+ * Request a GPIO. If the number of pins for this GPIO group is zero,
+ * then assume that the GPIO is unavailable.
+ */
+static int msm_request(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev, unsigned int offset)
These names are awful. Reminds me of the serial driver that has
functions like msm_reset(). But when in Rome this is how it goes
I suppose.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+{
+	struct msm_pinctrl *pctrl = pinctrl_dev_get_drvdata(pctldev);
+	const struct msm_pingroup *g;
+
+	g = &pctrl->soc->groups[offset];
+
+	return g->npins ? 0 : -ENODEV;
+}
+
 static const struct pinmux_ops msm_pinmux_ops = {
+	.request		= msm_request,
 	.get_functions_count	= msm_get_functions_count,
 	.get_function_name	= msm_get_function_name,
 	.get_function_groups	= msm_get_function_groups,
@@ -430,6 +445,14 @@ static int msm_gpio_get_direction(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int offset)
 
 	g = &pctrl->soc->groups[offset];
 
+	/*
+	 * If the GPIO is unavailable, just return error.  This is necessary
+	 * because the GPIO layer tries to initialize the direction of all
+	 * the GPIOs, even the ones that are unavailable.
+	 */
+	if (!g->npins)
+		return -ENODEV;
+
gpiochips also have a request() hook. Can we use that before
initializing direction to make sure the GPIO is accessible?
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
 	val = readl(pctrl->regs + g->ctl_reg);
 
 	/* 0 = output, 1 = input */
@@ -503,7 +531,7 @@ static void msm_gpio_dbg_show_one(struct seq_file *s,
 
 	seq_printf(s, " %-8s: %-3s %d", g->name, is_out ? "out" : "in", func);
 	seq_printf(s, " %dmA", msm_regval_to_drive(drive));
-	seq_printf(s, " %s", pulls[pull]);
+	seq_printf(s, " %s\n", pulls[pull]);
 }
 
 static void msm_gpio_dbg_show(struct seq_file *s, struct gpio_chip *chip)
@@ -511,10 +539,8 @@ static void msm_gpio_dbg_show(struct seq_file *s, struct gpio_chip *chip)
 	unsigned gpio = chip->base;
 	unsigned i;
 
-	for (i = 0; i < chip->ngpio; i++, gpio++) {
+	for (i = 0; i < chip->ngpio; i++, gpio++)
 		msm_gpio_dbg_show_one(s, NULL, chip, i, gpio);
-		seq_puts(s, "\n");
-	}
 }
Were these two hunks necessary? Looks like noise.

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help