Hey Alexandre,

On 01/19/2015 05:04 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:

On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 6:08 PM, Olliver Schinagl
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

From: Olliver Schinagl <redacted>

The gpio binding document says that new code should always use named
gpios. Patch 40b73183 added support to parse a list of gpios from child
nodes, but does not make it possible to use named gpios. This patch adds
the con_id property and implements it is done in gpiolib.c, where the
old-style of using unnamed gpios still works.

This is absolutely correct - thanks for spotting this.

<snip>
... since it looks like this part has been mostly copy/pasted from
of_find_gpio(), can you add another patch that fixes it there as well?

Yeah, since it has the same functionality, i copy pasted it. Wasn't sure 
if it was worth to macro it or anything. I've sent a v2 with that patch 
added to the mix :)

Also in the case of ACPI this will prove to be an incomplete lookup
since acpi_find_gpio() has an additional fallback if the named lookup
fails.

I'm not very familiar (or at all) how ACPI falls into all of this, I'm 
just starting to get a hang of the DT, but since this is how the dts is 
being parsed, where is the relation here? Or did I misunderstand?

In that respect, I wonder if it would not be better for
devm_get_gpiod_from_child() to call of_find_gpio() and
acpi_find_gpio() (after making them non-static) followed by
gpiod_request() instead of calling fwnode_get_named_gpiod(). But in
that case it will have to do the OF/ACPI handling by itself.

I'm not really sure about which way is better. I'd appreciate if you
could give a thought to a possible refactoring that would improve the
situation ; otherwise feel free to ignore what I have written above
and to duplicate the property name building code.

I'm afraid I'm a little too inexperienced to follow exactly what you say ;)

Olliver