From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Charles Keepax Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] pinctrl: samsung: Calculate GPIO base for pinctrl_add_gpio_range Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 16:49:09 +0000 Message-ID: <20170306164909.GA6986@localhost.localdomain> References: <20170228090143.GG2742@localhost.localdomain> <1488301475-10804-1-git-send-email-ckeepax@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-gpio-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Tomasz Figa Cc: "linus.walleij@linaro.org" , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Sylwester Nawrocki , "linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org" , linux-kernel , patches@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com List-Id: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Mar 04, 2017 at 08:20:11PM +0900, Tomasz Figa wrote: > Hi Charles, > > 2017-03-01 2:04 GMT+09:00 Charles Keepax : > > As the pinctrl is now added before the GPIOs are registered we need to > > manually calculate what the GPIO base will be, otherwise the base for > > each gpio_range will be set to zero. Fortunately the driver > > already assigns a GPIO base, in samsung_gpiolib_register, and uses the > > same calculation it does for the pin_base. Meaning the two will always > > be the same and allowing us to reuse the pinbase and avoid the issue. > > Sorry, I didn't notice before and I don't see the offending patch in , > but you should add > > Fixes: XXXXXXXXXXXX ("pinctrl: Patch subject") > > if you intend to submit this patch separately. Otherwise, maybe this > can be just squashed? > Yeah apologies for that as the original patch hasn't showed up in the tree yet I couldn't pull a commit ID to add the fixes tag. Squashing it in is probably the best way to go. Thanks, Charles