Re: [RFC PATCH v4 net-next 11/23] pinctrl: ocelot: update pinctrl to automatic base address
From: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
Date: 2021-11-16 17:36:42
Also in:
linux-arm-kernel, lkml, netdev
Hello, On 15/11/2021 22:23:16-0800, Colin Foster wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
struct gpio_chip recommends passing -1 as base to gpiolib. Doing so avoids conflicts when the chip is external and gpiochip0 already exists. Signed-off-by: Colin Foster <colin.foster@in-advantage.com> --- drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ocelot.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ocelot.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ocelot.c index cc7fb0556169..f015404c425c 100644 --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ocelot.c +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ocelot.c@@ -1308,7 +1308,7 @@ static int ocelot_gpiochip_register(struct platform_device *pdev, gc = &info->gpio_chip; gc->ngpio = info->desc->npins; gc->parent = &pdev->dev; - gc->base = 0; + gc->base = -1;
I can't remember why but I'm pretty sure I did that on purpose but this indeed cause issues when the chip is external. I've asked Clément to check, let's see what the result is ;)
gc->of_node = info->dev->of_node; gc->label = "ocelot-gpio"; -- 2.25.1
-- Alexandre Belloni, co-owner and COO, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com