* [PATCH 112/182] pinctrl: samsung: use gpiochip data pointer
@ 2015-12-09 13:33 Linus Walleij
2015-12-11 6:14 ` Tomasz Figa
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Linus Walleij @ 2015-12-09 13:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-gpio, Johan Hovold, Alexandre Courbot, Michael Welling,
Markus Pargmann
Cc: Linus Walleij, Tomasz Figa
This makes the driver use the data pointer added to the gpio_chip
to store a pointer to the state container instead of relying on
container_of().
Cc: Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
---
drivers/pinctrl/samsung/pinctrl-samsung.c | 15 +++++----------
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/samsung/pinctrl-samsung.c b/drivers/pinctrl/samsung/pinctrl-samsung.c
index bb4db2050f19..a4fb8379f521 100644
--- a/drivers/pinctrl/samsung/pinctrl-samsung.c
+++ b/drivers/pinctrl/samsung/pinctrl-samsung.c
@@ -50,11 +50,6 @@ static LIST_HEAD(drvdata_list);
static unsigned int pin_base;
-static inline struct samsung_pin_bank *gc_to_pin_bank(struct gpio_chip *gc)
-{
- return container_of(gc, struct samsung_pin_bank, gpio_chip);
-}
-
static int samsung_get_group_count(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev)
{
struct samsung_pinctrl_drv_data *pmx = pinctrl_dev_get_drvdata(pctldev);
@@ -522,7 +517,7 @@ static const struct pinconf_ops samsung_pinconf_ops = {
/* gpiolib gpio_set callback function */
static void samsung_gpio_set(struct gpio_chip *gc, unsigned offset, int value)
{
- struct samsung_pin_bank *bank = gc_to_pin_bank(gc);
+ struct samsung_pin_bank *bank = gpiochip_get_data(gc);
const struct samsung_pin_bank_type *type = bank->type;
unsigned long flags;
void __iomem *reg;
@@ -546,7 +541,7 @@ static int samsung_gpio_get(struct gpio_chip *gc, unsigned offset)
{
void __iomem *reg;
u32 data;
- struct samsung_pin_bank *bank = gc_to_pin_bank(gc);
+ struct samsung_pin_bank *bank = gpiochip_get_data(gc);
const struct samsung_pin_bank_type *type = bank->type;
reg = bank->drvdata->virt_base + bank->pctl_offset;
@@ -571,7 +566,7 @@ static int samsung_gpio_set_direction(struct gpio_chip *gc,
u32 data, mask, shift;
unsigned long flags;
- bank = gc_to_pin_bank(gc);
+ bank = gpiochip_get_data(gc);
type = bank->type;
drvdata = bank->drvdata;
@@ -619,7 +614,7 @@ static int samsung_gpio_direction_output(struct gpio_chip *gc, unsigned offset,
*/
static int samsung_gpio_to_irq(struct gpio_chip *gc, unsigned offset)
{
- struct samsung_pin_bank *bank = gc_to_pin_bank(gc);
+ struct samsung_pin_bank *bank = gpiochip_get_data(gc);
unsigned int virq;
if (!bank->irq_domain)
@@ -918,7 +913,7 @@ static int samsung_gpiolib_register(struct platform_device *pdev,
gc->of_node = bank->of_node;
gc->label = bank->name;
- ret = gpiochip_add(gc);
+ ret = gpiochip_add_data(gc, bank);
if (ret) {
dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to register gpio_chip %s, error code: %d\n",
gc->label, ret);
--
2.4.3
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 112/182] pinctrl: samsung: use gpiochip data pointer
2015-12-09 13:33 [PATCH 112/182] pinctrl: samsung: use gpiochip data pointer Linus Walleij
@ 2015-12-11 6:14 ` Tomasz Figa
2015-12-14 13:55 ` Linus Walleij
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Tomasz Figa @ 2015-12-11 6:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Walleij
Cc: linux-gpio, Johan Hovold, Alexandre Courbot, Michael Welling,
Markus Pargmann
Hi Linus,
2015-12-09 22:33 GMT+09:00 Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>:
> This makes the driver use the data pointer added to the gpio_chip
> to store a pointer to the state container instead of relying on
> container_of().
I always thought container_of() was preferred because of higher type
safety than void *data pointers. Is there any reason for mandating the
(IMHO worse) new method of accessing data, even though the one
currently used seems to be still valid?
Best regards,
Tomasz
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 112/182] pinctrl: samsung: use gpiochip data pointer
2015-12-11 6:14 ` Tomasz Figa
@ 2015-12-14 13:55 ` Linus Walleij
2015-12-14 14:00 ` Tomasz Figa
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Linus Walleij @ 2015-12-14 13:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tomasz Figa
Cc: linux-gpio, Johan Hovold, Alexandre Courbot, Michael Welling,
Markus Pargmann
On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 7:14 AM, Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Linus,
>
> 2015-12-09 22:33 GMT+09:00 Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>:
>> This makes the driver use the data pointer added to the gpio_chip
>> to store a pointer to the state container instead of relying on
>> container_of().
>
> I always thought container_of() was preferred because of higher type
> safety than void *data pointers. Is there any reason for mandating the
> (IMHO worse) new method of accessing data, even though the one
> currently used seems to be still valid?
This is explained in patch 000/182:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-gpio&m=144966662402660&w=2
In the generic GPIO case it gets really really messy with
container_of(container_of(x)) in every driver, making the code
so hard to read that it becomes a pain to maintain and do the
right thing, trumping any type safety.
Unless someone has a real performance issue I think this is
the way to go.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 112/182] pinctrl: samsung: use gpiochip data pointer
2015-12-14 13:55 ` Linus Walleij
@ 2015-12-14 14:00 ` Tomasz Figa
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Tomasz Figa @ 2015-12-14 14:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Walleij
Cc: linux-gpio, Johan Hovold, Alexandre Courbot, Michael Welling,
Markus Pargmann
2015-12-14 22:55 GMT+09:00 Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>:
> On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 7:14 AM, Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Linus,
>>
>> 2015-12-09 22:33 GMT+09:00 Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>:
>>> This makes the driver use the data pointer added to the gpio_chip
>>> to store a pointer to the state container instead of relying on
>>> container_of().
>>
>> I always thought container_of() was preferred because of higher type
>> safety than void *data pointers. Is there any reason for mandating the
>> (IMHO worse) new method of accessing data, even though the one
>> currently used seems to be still valid?
>
> This is explained in patch 000/182:
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-gpio&m=144966662402660&w=2
Okay, fair enough.
Acked-by: Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com>
Best regards,
Tomasz
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2015-12-14 14:00 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2015-12-09 13:33 [PATCH 112/182] pinctrl: samsung: use gpiochip data pointer Linus Walleij
2015-12-11 6:14 ` Tomasz Figa
2015-12-14 13:55 ` Linus Walleij
2015-12-14 14:00 ` Tomasz Figa
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.