From: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Cc: Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@gmail.com>,
Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@nvidia.com>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
"maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)"
<x86@kernel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
"open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"moderated list:ARM PORT" <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"open list:GENERIC INCLUDE/ASM HEADER FILES"
<linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio: Allow user to customise maximum number of GPIOs
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2022 13:11:16 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1289c5fd-2600-66ae-919e-3d48885e4f8f@csgroup.eu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAK8P3a0uuJ_z8wmNmQTW_qPNqzz7XoxZdHgqbzmK+ydtjraeHg@mail.gmail.com>
Le 18/08/2022 à 14:46, Arnd Bergmann a écrit :
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 2:25 PM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 1:33 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 1:13 PM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote:
>>>> I think there may be systems and users that still depend on GPIO base
>>>> numbers being assigned from ARCH_NR_GPIOS and
>>>> downwards (userspace GPIO numbers in sysfs will also change...)
>>>> otherwise we could assign from 0 and up.
>>>
>>> Is it possible to find in-kernel users that depend on well-known
>>> numbers for dynamically assigned gpios? I would argue
>>> that those are always broken.
>>
>> Most in-kernel users hard-code the base to something like
>> 0 etc it's only the ones that code -1 into .base that are in
>> trouble because that will activate dynamic assignment for the
>> base.
>>
>> git grep 'base = -1' yields these suspects:
>>
>> arch/arm/common/sa1111.c: sachip->gc.base = -1;
>> arch/arm/common/scoop.c: devptr->gpio.base = -1;
>> arch/powerpc/platforms/52xx/mpc52xx_gpt.c: gpt->gc.base = -1;
>> arch/powerpc/platforms/83xx/mcu_mpc8349emitx.c: gc->base = -1;
>>
>> That's all! We could just calculate these to 512-ngpios and
>> hardcode that instead.
>
> How do the consumers find the numbers for these four?
>
>>>> Right now the safest would be:
>>>> Assign from 512 and downwards until we hit 0 then assign
>>>> from something high, like U32_MAX and downward.
>>>>
>>>> That requires dropping gpio_is_valid() everywhere.
>>>>
>>>> If we wanna be bold, just delete gpio_is_valid() and assign
>>>> bases from 0 and see what happens. But I think that will
>>>> lead to regressions.
>>>
>>> I'm still unsure how removing gpio_is_valid() would help.
>>
>> If we allow GPIO base all the way to U32_MAX
>> this function becomes:
>>
>> static inline bool gpio_is_valid(int number)
>> {
>> return number >= 0 && number < U32_MAX;
>> }
>>
>> and we can then just
>>
>> #define gpio_is_valid true
>>
>> and in that case it is better to delete the use of this function
>> altogether since it can not fail.
>
> S32_MAX might be a better upper bound. That allows to
> just have no number assigned to a gpio chip. Any driver
> code calling desc_to_gpio() could then get back -1
> or a negative error code.
>
> Making the ones that are invalid today valid sounds like
> a step backwards to me if the goal is to stop using
> gpio numbers and most consumers no longer need them.
>
What about GPIO AGGREGATOR, drivers/gpio/gpio-aggregator.c
bitmap = bitmap_alloc(ARCH_NR_GPIOS, GFP_KERNEL);
Christophe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-18 13:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-08-09 10:40 [PATCH] gpio: Allow user to customise maximum number of GPIOs Christophe Leroy
2022-08-11 19:57 ` H. Peter Anvin
2022-08-12 21:58 ` Andy Shevchenko
2022-08-12 23:21 ` H. Peter Anvin
2022-08-17 17:21 ` Christophe Leroy
2022-08-17 17:46 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-08-18 6:00 ` Christophe Leroy
2022-08-18 8:25 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-08-18 9:33 ` Linus Walleij
2022-08-18 9:47 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-08-18 11:13 ` Linus Walleij
2022-08-18 11:33 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-08-18 12:25 ` Linus Walleij
2022-08-18 12:46 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-08-18 13:11 ` Christophe Leroy [this message]
2022-08-25 13:36 ` Linus Walleij
2022-08-25 14:00 ` Christophe Leroy
2022-08-26 13:49 ` Linus Walleij
2022-08-26 15:08 ` Christophe Leroy
2022-08-26 21:54 ` Linus Walleij
2022-08-28 9:06 ` Christophe Leroy
2022-08-28 10:04 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-08-30 7:58 ` Davide Ciminaghi
2022-08-31 13:32 ` Linus Walleij
2022-08-31 14:12 ` Davide Ciminaghi
2022-08-31 21:07 ` Andy Shevchenko
2022-08-31 21:48 ` Davide Ciminaghi
2022-08-30 8:33 ` Alessandro Rubini
2022-08-30 9:03 ` Christophe Leroy
2022-08-28 11:35 ` Linus Walleij
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:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1289c5fd-2600-66ae-919e-3d48885e4f8f@csgroup.eu \
--to=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
--cc=acourbot@nvidia.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=brgl@bgdev.pl \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=gnurou@gmail.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* 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).