From: Matti Vaittinen <email@example.com>
To: Linus Walleij <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: "Bartosz Golaszewski" <email@example.com>,
"GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
"Álvaro Fernández Rojas" <email@example.com>,
"Linus Walleij" <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
"Michael Walle" <email@example.com>
Subject: regmap-gpio: Support set_config and other not quite so standard ICs?
Date: Mon, 10 May 2021 15:58:13 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2950 bytes --]
Hi Linus, All,
On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 12:32 +0200, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 10:35 +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > It could potentially (like the other Rohm GPIO MFD PMIC drivers)
> > make some use of the gpio regmap library, but we have some
> > pending changes for that so look into it after the next merge
> > window.
> > I.e. for your TODO: look at the GPIO_REGMAP helper.
> I just took a quick peek at gpio_regmap and it looks pretty good to
> Any particular reason why gpio_regmap is not just part of gpio_chip?
> guess providing the 'gpio_regmap_direction_*()', 'gpio_regmap_get()',
> 'gpio_regmap_set()' as exported helpers and leaving calling the
> (devm_)gpiochip_add_data() to IC driver would have allowed more
> flexibility. Drivers could then use the gpio_regamap features which
> the IC (by providing pointers to helper functions in gpio_chip) - and
> handle potential oddball-features by using pointers to some
> functions in gpio_chip.
So, v5.13-rc1 is out. I started wondering the gpio_regamap - and same
question persists. Why hiding the gpio_chip from gpio_regmap users?
Current IF makes it very hard (impossible?) for driver to override any
of the regmap_gpio functions (or provide own alternatives) for cases
which do not fit the generic regmap_gpio model.
My first obstacle is providing gpio_chip.set_config for BD71815.
1) I guess the method fitting current design would be adding drive-mode
register/mask(s) to the gpio_regmap_config. Certainly doable - but I
have a bad feeling of this approach. I am afraid this leads to bloating
the gpio_regmap_config with all kinds of IC specific workarounds (when
HW designers have invented new cool control registers setups) - or then
just not using the regmap_gpio for any ICs which have any quirks - even
if 90% of regmap_gpio logic would fit...
2) Other possibility is allowing IC driver to provide function pointers
for some operations (in my case for example for the set_config) - if
the default operation the regmap_gpio provides does not fit the IC.
This would require the regmap_gpio to be visible to IC drivers so that
IC drivers can access the regmap, device & register information - or
some way to convert the gpio_chip pointer to IC specific private data
pointer. Doable but still slightly bloat.
3) The last option would be adding pointer to regmap_gpio to gpio_chip
- and exporting the regmap_gpio functions as helpers - leaving the gpio
registration to be done by the IC driver. That would allow IC driver to
use the regmap_gpio helpers which suit the IC and write own functions
for rest of the stuff.
I'd like to hear opinions - should I draft some changes according to
these proposals (which one, 1,2,3 or something else?) - or as this all
been already discussed and am I just missing something?
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-10 13:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-24 7:21 [PATCH v4 00/16] Support ROHM BD71815 PMIC Matti Vaittinen
2021-03-24 7:23 ` [PATCH v4 03/16] dt_bindings: bd71828: Add clock output mode Matti Vaittinen
2021-03-24 7:25 ` [PATCH v4 06/16] mfd: Add ROHM BD71815 ID Matti Vaittinen
2021-03-24 7:26 ` [PATCH v4 07/16] mfd: Sort ROHM chip ID list for better readability Matti Vaittinen
2021-03-24 7:26 ` [PATCH v4 08/16] mfd: Support for ROHM BD71815 PMIC core Matti Vaittinen
2021-03-24 7:29 ` [PATCH v4 09/16] gpio: support ROHM BD71815 GPOs Matti Vaittinen
2021-03-25 9:35 ` Linus Walleij
2021-03-25 10:32 ` Matti Vaittinen
2021-05-10 12:58 ` Matti Vaittinen [this message]
2021-05-10 16:54 ` regmap-gpio: Support set_config and other not quite so standard ICs? Andy Shevchenko
2021-05-11 3:59 ` Matti Vaittinen
2021-05-14 20:34 ` Michael Walle
2021-05-17 4:46 ` Vaittinen, Matti
2021-03-26 11:26 ` [PATCH v4 09/16] gpio: support ROHM BD71815 GPOs Andy Shevchenko
2021-03-26 11:27 ` Andy Shevchenko
2021-03-26 13:33 ` Matti Vaittinen
2021-03-26 17:51 ` Andy Shevchenko
2021-03-28 16:59 ` Matti Vaittinen
2021-03-24 7:31 ` [PATCH v4 16/16] MAINTAINERS: Add ROHM BD71815AGW Matti Vaittinen
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 \
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).