Linux-GPIO Archive on
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Eugeniu Rosca <>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <>
Cc: Eugeniu Rosca <>,
	Linus Walleij <>,
	Harish Jenny K N <>,
	Rob Herring <>,
	Mark Rutland <>,
	Bartosz Golaszewski <>,
	Balasubramani Vivekanandan 
	Laurent Pinchart <>,
	Stephen Warren <>,
	Stephen Warren <>,
	Phil Reid <>,
	Enrico Weigelt <>,
	"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <>,
	Eugeniu Rosca <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 2/2] gpio: inverter: document the inverter bindings
Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2019 15:07:40 +0200
Message-ID: <20191005130740.GA22620@x230> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

Hi Geert,

On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 11:07:20AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:


> My standard reply would be: describe the device connected to the GPIO(s)
> in DT.  The GPIO line polarities are specified in the device's "gpios"
> properties.
> BTW, can you give an example of what's actually connected to those
> GPIOs?
> Is it a complex device (the GPIO is only a part of it, it's also hanging
> off e.g. an I2C bus)?
> Is it something simple (e.g. an LED ("gpio-leds"), relay, or actuator)?

Since the targeted user of the new feature is not in immediate vicinity,
we expect some delay in getting this information.

> Next step would be to use the device from Linux.  For that to work, you
> need a dedicated driver (for the complex case), or something generic
> (for the simple case).
> The latter is not unlike e.g. spidev.  Once you have a generic driver,
> you can use "driver_override" in sysfs to bind the generic driver to
> your device.  See e.g. commit 5039563e7c25eccd ("spi: Add
> driver_override SPI device attribute").

We have passed your suggestions along. Many thanks.

> Currently we don't have a "generic" driver for GPIOs. We do have the
> GPIO chardev interface, which exports a full gpio_chip.
> It indeed looks like this "gpio-inverter" could be used as a generic
> driver.  But it is limited to GPIOs that are inverted, which rules out
> some use cases.
> So what about making it more generic, and dropping the "inverter" from
> its name, and the "inverted" from the "inverted-gpios" property? After
> all the inversion can be specified by the polarity of the GPIO cells in
> the "gpios" property, and the GPIO core will take care of it[*]?
> Which boils down to adding a simple DT interface to my gpio-aggregator
> ("[PATCH/RFC v2 0/5] gpio: Add GPIO Aggregator Driver",
> And now I have realized[*], we probably no longer need the GPIO
> Forwarder Helper, as there is no need to add inversion on top.

After having a look at the gpio aggregator (and giving it a try on
R-Car3 H3ULCB), here is how I interpret the above comment:

If there is still a compelling reason for having gpio-inverter, then it
probably makes sense to strip it from its "inverter" function (hence,
transforming it into some kind of "repeater") on the basis that the
inverting function is more of a collateral/secondary feature, rather
than its primary one. Just like in the case of gpio aggregator, the
primary function of gpio inverter is to accept a bunch of GPIO lines and
to expose those via a dedicated gpiochip. I hope this is a proper
summary of the first point in your comment. In any case, this is the
understanding I get based on my experiments with both drivers.

What I also infer is that, assuming gpio-inverter will stay (potentially
renamed and stripped of its non-essential inverting function), the gpio
aggregator will need to keep its Forwarder Helper (supposed to act as a
common foundation for both drivers).

The second point which I extract from your comment is that the "gpio
aggregator" could alternatively acquire the role of "gpio-inverter"
(hence superseding it) by adding a "simple DT interface". I actually
tend to like this proposal, since (as said above) both drivers are
essentially doing the same thing, i.e. they cluster a number of gpio
lines and expose this cluster as a new gpiochip (keeping the
reserved/used gpio lines on hold). That looks like a huge overlap in
the functionalities of the two drivers.

The only difference which I see is that "gpio-inverter" is getting its
input from DT and generates the gpiochips at probe time, while
"gpio aggregator" is getting its input from sysfs and generates the
gpiochips at runtime, post-probe.

So, assuming no objections from Harish and other reviewers, I would be
very happy to review and test the DT-based gpio inversion functionality
as part of gpio aggregator. Thanks!

Best Regards,

  reply index

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-06-28  9:30 Harish Jenny K N
2019-07-04  5:01 ` Harish Jenny K N
2019-07-08 22:36 ` Rob Herring
2019-07-09  5:25   ` Harish Jenny K N
2019-07-09 16:08     ` Rob Herring
2019-07-10  8:28       ` Harish Jenny K N
2019-07-17 13:51         ` Harish Jenny K N
2019-07-29 11:07           ` Harish Jenny K N
2019-08-05 11:15         ` Linus Walleij
2019-08-09 14:08           ` Rob Herring
2019-08-10  8:51             ` Linus Walleij
2019-08-19  9:36               ` Harish Jenny K N
2019-08-27  7:47                 ` Harish Jenny K N
2019-08-30  5:21                   ` Harish Jenny K N
2019-09-04  4:58                     ` Harish Jenny K N
2019-09-10  7:47                       ` Rob Herring
2019-09-11 12:52                         ` Harish Jenny K N
2019-09-25 16:51 ` Eugeniu Rosca
2019-09-27  5:52   ` Phil Reid
2019-09-27  9:07   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-10-05 13:07     ` Eugeniu Rosca [this message]
2019-10-07  8:18       ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-10-11  4:35         ` Harish Jenny K N
2019-11-12 11:52           ` Harish Jenny K N
2019-11-12 12:19             ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-10-04 19:07   ` Stephen Warren
2019-10-05 17:50     ` Eugeniu Rosca
2019-10-07 15:36       ` Stephen Warren
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2019-06-28  5:20 [PATCH V4 0/2] Add Inverter controller for gpio configuration Harish Jenny K N
2019-06-28  5:20 ` [PATCH V4 2/2] gpio: inverter: document the inverter bindings Harish Jenny K N

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20191005130740.GA22620@x230 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

Linux-GPIO Archive on

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror linux-gpio/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 linux-gpio linux-gpio/ \
	public-inbox-index linux-gpio

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:

AGPL code for this site: git clone