[GIT PULL] pin control fixes for the v5.17 series

[GIT PULL] pin control fixes for the v5.17 series

[Linus Walleij]

Hi Linus,

some more pin control fixes that trickled in the last week or
two.

Please pull it in, some details are in the signed tag!

Yours,
Linus Walleij

The following changes since commit dfd42facf1e4ada021b939b4e19c935dcdd55566:

  Linux 5.17-rc3 (2022-02-06 12:20:50 -0800)

are available in the Git repository at:

  git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/linusw/linux-pinctrl.git
tags/pinctrl-v5-17-3

for you to fetch changes up to 486c2d15aa812d669bb27f8241aa5d5dafbac5b9:

  Merge tag 'intel-pinctrl-v5.17-5' of
gitolite.kernel.org:pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/pinctrl/intel into fixes
(2022-02-19 02:03:58 +0100)

----------------------------------------------------------------
Pin control fixes for the v5.17 series:

- Fix some drive strength and pull-up code in the K210 driver.

- Add the Alder Lake-M ACPI ID so it starts to work properly.

- Use a static name for the StarFive GPIO irq_chip, forestalling
  an upcoming fixes series from Marc Zyngier.

- Fix an ages old bug in the Tegra 186 driver where we were
  indexing at random into struct and being lucky getting the
  right member.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Shevchenko (1):
      pinctrl: tigerlake: Revert "Add Alder Lake-M ACPI ID"

Dan Carpenter (1):
      pinctrl: fix loop in k210_pinconf_get_drive()

Linus Walleij (1):
      Merge tag 'intel-pinctrl-v5.17-5' of
gitolite.kernel.org:pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/pinctrl/intel into fixes

Marc Zyngier (2):
      pinctrl: starfive: Use a static name for the GPIO irq_chip
      gpio: tegra186: Fix chip_data type confusion

Sean Anderson (1):
      pinctrl: k210: Fix bias-pull-up

 drivers/gpio/gpio-tegra186.c              | 14 ++++++++++----
 drivers/pinctrl/intel/pinctrl-tigerlake.c |  1 -
 drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-k210.c            |  4 ++--
 drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-starfive.c        |  2 +-
 4 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

Re: [GIT PULL] pin control fixes for the v5.17 series

[Linus Torvalds]

On Sat, Feb 26, 2022 at 5:11 PM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> some more pin control fixes that trickled in the last week or
> two.

Hmm. Am I confused because I thought I'd see a fix for the orangepi
problem that Guenter has been reporting?

That problem has been pending for quite a while now.

               Linus

Re: [GIT PULL] pin control fixes for the v5.17 series

[pr-tracker-bot]

The pull request you sent on Sun, 27 Feb 2022 02:11:27 +0100:

> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/linusw/linux-pinctrl.git tags/pinctrl-v5-17-3

has been merged into torvalds/linux.git:
https://git.kernel.org/torvalds/c/6676ba2a6df6864a6b7b11f20166026e2201b627

Thank you!

-- 
Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
https://korg.docs.kernel.org/prtracker.html

Re: [GIT PULL] pin control fixes for the v5.17 series

[Linus Walleij]

On Sun, Feb 27, 2022 at 9:38 PM Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Feb 26, 2022 at 5:11 PM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote:
> >
> > some more pin control fixes that trickled in the last week or
> > two.
>
> Hmm. Am I confused because I thought I'd see a fix for the orangepi
> problem that Guenter has been reporting?
>
> That problem has been pending for quite a while now.

OK let's poke Hans, he usually fix things quickly so it must have been missed.

Hans did you see Guenthers remark here:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-gpio/20220128172003.GA2666058@roeck-us.net/

Do you want to attempt patching it or shall I just revert the patch for now?

Yours,
Linus Walleij

Re: [GIT PULL] pin control fixes for the v5.17 series

[Guenter Roeck]

On 2/28/22 06:43, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 27, 2022 at 9:38 PM Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 26, 2022 at 5:11 PM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> some more pin control fixes that trickled in the last week or
>>> two.
>>
>> Hmm. Am I confused because I thought I'd see a fix for the orangepi
>> problem that Guenter has been reporting?
>>
>> That problem has been pending for quite a while now.
> 
> OK let's poke Hans, he usually fix things quickly so it must have been missed.
> 
> Hans did you see Guenthers remark here:
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-gpio/20220128172003.GA2666058@roeck-us.net/
> 
> Do you want to attempt patching it or shall I just revert the patch for now?
> 
> Yours,
> Linus Walleij

The fix has long since been submitted and is available in linux-next.

 From my notes:

Fix posted at
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-media/patch/0f536cd8-01db-5d16-2cec-ec6d19409a49@xs4all.nl/
and in linux-next as commit 3c5412cdec9f ("pinctrl-sunxi:
sunxi_pinctrl_gpio_direction_in/output: use correct offset").
The fix exposes a lockdep splat for which a fix is posted at
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220216040037.22730-1-samuel@sholland.org/
This patch is available in linux-next as commit 4649b97042c3 ("pinctrl:
sunxi: Use unique lockdep classes for IRQs").

Guenter

Re: [GIT PULL] pin control fixes for the v5.17 series

[Hans Verkuil]

On 2/28/22 15:59, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 2/28/22 06:43, Linus Walleij wrote:
>> On Sun, Feb 27, 2022 at 9:38 PM Linus Torvalds
>> <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sat, Feb 26, 2022 at 5:11 PM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> some more pin control fixes that trickled in the last week or
>>>> two.
>>>
>>> Hmm. Am I confused because I thought I'd see a fix for the orangepi
>>> problem that Guenter has been reporting?
>>>
>>> That problem has been pending for quite a while now.
>>
>> OK let's poke Hans, he usually fix things quickly so it must have been missed.
>>
>> Hans did you see Guenthers remark here:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-gpio/20220128172003.GA2666058@roeck-us.net/
>>
>> Do you want to attempt patching it or shall I just revert the patch for now?
>>
>> Yours,
>> Linus Walleij
> 
> The fix has long since been submitted and is available in linux-next.
> 
> From my notes:
> 
> Fix posted at
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-media/patch/0f536cd8-01db-5d16-2cec-ec6d19409a49@xs4all.nl/
> and in linux-next as commit 3c5412cdec9f ("pinctrl-sunxi:
> sunxi_pinctrl_gpio_direction_in/output: use correct offset").
> The fix exposes a lockdep splat for which a fix is posted at
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220216040037.22730-1-samuel@sholland.org/
> This patch is available in linux-next as commit 4649b97042c3 ("pinctrl:
> sunxi: Use unique lockdep classes for IRQs").

Thank you, Guenter, I was just working on a similar reply.

That's my understanding as well.

Regards,

	Hans

> 
> Guenter

Re: [GIT PULL] pin control fixes for the v5.17 series

[Linus Torvalds]

On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 6:44 AM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Feb 27, 2022 at 9:38 PM Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hmm. Am I confused because I thought I'd see a fix for the orangepi
> > problem that Guenter has been reporting?
>
> OK let's poke Hans, he usually fix things quickly so it must have been missed.

Well, part of me being confused is that I've literally seen you reply
with 'patch applied' to the fixes.. Ie:

    https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CACRpkdZ1nFAmzRvsvKvZ08fsP_MgsnsiNpD7LdRRXUDWtO_w=Q@mail.gmail.com/

but then I didn't get the result.

Afaik, that patch is only relevant if you applied the previous fix
("pinctrl-sunxi: use the right offset" or something like that).

I get the feeling that you didn't realize that this was a 5.17 issue,
and have maybe applied them to the wrong branch, and they are pending
for the next merge window.

            Linus

Re: [GIT PULL] pin control fixes for the v5.17 series

[Linus Walleij]

On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 8:15 PM Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

> Well, part of me being confused is that I've literally seen you reply
> with 'patch applied' to the fixes.. Ie:
>
>     https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CACRpkdZ1nFAmzRvsvKvZ08fsP_MgsnsiNpD7LdRRXUDWtO_w=Q@mail.gmail.com/
>
> but then I didn't get the result.
>
> Afaik, that patch is only relevant if you applied the previous fix
> ("pinctrl-sunxi: use the right offset" or something like that).

Yes this is the issue, reading that patch series does not really make it
clear that it should be applied, also it gets into next through something that
is not my tree so I get a bit confused and feel a bit out of control here.

Anyways I will apply that patch:


> I get the feeling that you didn't realize that this was a 5.17 issue,
> and have maybe applied them to the wrong branch, and they are pending
> for the next merge window.

Indeed.

The Fixes tag on the latter patch refers to another commit
entirely so it was applied on its own merits, for next.

I'll take these two:

pinctrl-sunxi: sunxi_pinctrl_gpio_direction_in/output: use correct offset
pinctrl: sunxi: Use unique lockdep classes for IRQs

and put them into fixes, that should nail it.

Yours,
Linus Walleij

Re: [GIT PULL] pin control fixes for the v5.17 series

[Linus Torvalds]

On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 2:50 PM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> I'll take these two:
>
> pinctrl-sunxi: sunxi_pinctrl_gpio_direction_in/output: use correct offset
> pinctrl: sunxi: Use unique lockdep classes for IRQs
>
> and put them into fixes, that should nail it.

Thanks. One down, two more of Guenter's reports to go. But iirc they
both at least had fixes pending too.

Let's hope they aren't in the wrong queue as well ;)

                Linus