Hi Andy,

On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 04:40:16PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 2:30 PM, Sakari Ailus [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 03:49:18AM +0000, Mani, Rajmohan wrote:

quoted

quoted

On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 2:55 PM, Rajmohan Mani [off-list ref]
wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

Besides my below comments, just put it here that I recommended earlier to
provide 2 GPIO chips (one per bank of GPIOs).
It's up to Linus to decide since you didn't follow the recommendation.

quoted

quoted

Did you mean to add this in Kconfig or this source file?

Here's some more details on these GPIOs.
Each of these 7 GPIOs has 2 registers to control the mode, level, drive strength, polarity, hysteresis control among other things. Also there are GPDI and GPDO registers to control the input and output values of these 7 GPIOs. These GPIOs are numbered 0 through 6.
The remaining 3 GPIOs are more of special purpose GPIOs that are output only, with one register to control all of their output values and drive strengths. These GPIOs are named with a special purpose (ENABLE, IDLE and RESET of the sensor).

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

+#include <linux/mfd/tps68470.h>
+#include <linux/module.h>
+#include <linux/platform_device.h>

quoted

+       if (offset >= TPS68470_N_REGULAR_GPIO) {
+               offset -= TPS68470_N_REGULAR_GPIO;
+               reg = TPS68470_REG_SGPO;
+       }

Two GPIO chips makes this gone.

Again, I'm not really worried about this driver, but the ACPI tables. How
does the difference show there?

Same way. You will have common numbering over the chip [0, 9]. It will
be just an abstraction inside the driver.

Oh, in that case that should be a non-issue.

quoted

The outputs (s_enable, s_idle and s_resetn) are not numbered in the
documentation. There grouped, though, but the order in that grouping varies.

I don't get this. You are telling that the property of "always output"
can be assigned to any 3 out of 10?

No, I'm telling you that the three (s_enable, s_idle and s_resetn) cannot be
configured as inputs --- instead they're always outputs. That's how the
hardware is implemented.

Above states the opposite, so, it's clear to me that abstraction of 2
GPIO chips over 1 can be utilized here.

Sounds fine to me, taken that this does not add complications to ACPI
tables.

-- 
Regards,

Sakari Ailus
e-mail: sakari.ailus@iki.fi	XMPP: sailus@retiisi.org.uk