From: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>,
"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@gmail.com>,
Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
Bryan Wu <cooloney@gmail.com>,
Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 07/12] leds: leds-gpio: Add support for GPIO descriptors
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 10:53:06 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141029085306.GI1304@lahna.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <17483842.EFni4iQX1H@vostro.rjw.lan>
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 10:56:09PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 28, 2014 04:26:25 PM Linus Walleij wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 2:11 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote:
> >
> > > From: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
> > >
> > > GPIO descriptors are the preferred way over legacy GPIO numbers
> > > nowadays. Convert the driver to use GPIO descriptors internally but
> > > still allow passing legacy GPIO numbers from platform data to support
> > > existing platforms.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
> > > Acked-by: Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@nvidia.com>
> > > Acked-by: Bryan Wu <cooloney@gmail.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> > (...)
> >
> > > if (led_dat->blinking) {
> > > - led_dat->platform_gpio_blink_set(led_dat->gpio,
> > > - led_dat->new_level,
> > > - NULL, NULL);
> > > + int gpio = desc_to_gpio(led_dat->gpiod);
> > > + int level = led_dat->new_level;
> >
> > So this desc_to_gpio() is done only to call the legacy callback below?
> >
> > > + if (gpiod_is_active_low(led_dat->gpiod))
> > > + level = !level;
> >
> > And that leads to making it necessary to have this helper variable
> > to invert the level since that callback does not pass a descriptor
> > (which would inherently know if it's active low)....
> >
> > > +
> > > + led_dat->platform_gpio_blink_set(gpio, level, NULL, NULL);
> >
> > Is it *really* impossible to change all the users of this callback?
>
> You said it could be done in a followup patch. Here:
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-acpi&m=141154536921643&w=4
>
> And Mika said he would add that to his TODO list:
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-acpi&m=141155173924101&w=4
>
> I suppose that is still valid.
Yes, I'll just let dust to settle before sending out a patch that
converts the existing users of platform_gpio_blink_set() callback to
gpio descriptors.
>
> >
> > > led_dat->blinking = 0;
> > > } else
> > > - gpio_set_value_cansleep(led_dat->gpio, led_dat->new_level);
> > > + gpiod_set_value_cansleep(led_dat->gpiod, led_dat->new_level);
> >
> > (...)
> > > /* Setting GPIOs with I2C/etc requires a task context, and we don't
> > > * seem to have a reliable way to know if we're already in one; so
> > > * let's just assume the worst.
> > > @@ -72,11 +73,16 @@ static void gpio_led_set(struct led_clas
> > > schedule_work(&led_dat->work);
> > > } else {
> > > if (led_dat->blinking) {
> > > - led_dat->platform_gpio_blink_set(led_dat->gpio, level,
> > > - NULL, NULL);
> > > + int gpio = desc_to_gpio(led_dat->gpiod);
> > > +
> > > + if (gpiod_is_active_low(led_dat->gpiod))
> > > + level = !level;
> > > +
> > > + led_dat->platform_gpio_blink_set(gpio, level, NULL,
> > > + NULL);
> >
> > Same comment.
> >
> > > @@ -85,9 +91,10 @@ static int gpio_blink_set(struct led_cla
> > > {
> > > struct gpio_led_data *led_dat =
> > > container_of(led_cdev, struct gpio_led_data, cdev);
> > > + int gpio = desc_to_gpio(led_dat->gpiod);
> > >
> > > led_dat->blinking = 1;
> > > - return led_dat->platform_gpio_blink_set(led_dat->gpio, GPIO_LED_BLINK,
> > > + return led_dat->platform_gpio_blink_set(gpio, GPIO_LED_BLINK,
> > > delay_on, delay_off);
> >
> > Same comment.
> >
> > > @@ -97,24 +104,33 @@ static int create_gpio_led(const struct
> > > {
> > > int ret, state;
> > >
> > > - led_dat->gpio = -1;
> > > + if (!template->gpiod) {
> > > + unsigned long flags = 0;
> > >
> > > - /* skip leds that aren't available */
> > > - if (!gpio_is_valid(template->gpio)) {
> > > - dev_info(parent, "Skipping unavailable LED gpio %d (%s)\n",
> > > - template->gpio, template->name);
> > > - return 0;
> > > + /* skip leds that aren't available */
> > > + if (!gpio_is_valid(template->gpio)) {
> > > + dev_info(parent, "Skipping unavailable LED gpio %d (%s)\n",
> > > + template->gpio, template->name);
> > > + return 0;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + if (template->active_low)
> > > + flags |= GPIOF_ACTIVE_LOW;
> > > +
> > > + ret = devm_gpio_request_one(parent, template->gpio, flags,
> > > + template->name);
> > > + if (ret < 0)
> > > + return ret;
> > > +
> > > + led_dat->gpiod = gpio_to_desc(template->gpio);
> > > + if (IS_ERR(led_dat->gpiod))
> > > + return PTR_ERR(led_dat->gpiod);
> > > }
> >
> > OK so this is the legacy codepath: point it out in a big fat
> > comment that this is the legacy codepath.
>
> That looks like it could be done in a followup patch too.
>
> Since the series is in my linux-next branch at this point, I really wouldn't
> like to reshuffle commits in it if that can be avoided.
>
> > > Index: linux-pm/include/linux/leds.h
> > > ===================================================================
> > > --- linux-pm.orig/include/linux/leds.h
> > > +++ linux-pm/include/linux/leds.h
> > > @@ -251,6 +251,7 @@ struct gpio_led {
> > > unsigned retain_state_suspended : 1;
> > > unsigned default_state : 2;
> > > /* default_state should be one of LEDS_GPIO_DEFSTATE_(ON|OFF|KEEP) */
> > > + struct gpio_desc *gpiod;
> >
> > Put the new struct member right below the current "gpio"
> > member,
>
> It was done like that in previous versions, but turned out to cause problems
> to happen in testing. Unfortunately, I don't seem to be able to find a pointer
> to the original report ATM, but perhaps Mika can. Mika?
It is burried inside this thread:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg369522.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-10-29 8:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 104+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-10-07 0:10 [PATCH v4 00/13] Add ACPI _DSD and unified device properties support Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-07 0:12 ` [PATCH 01/13] ACPI: Add support for device specific properties Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-13 12:47 ` Grant Likely
2014-10-07 0:12 ` [PATCH 02/13] Driver core: Unified device properties interface for platform firmware Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-07 0:13 ` [PATCH 03/13] ACPI: Allow drivers to match using Device Tree compatible property Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-14 13:38 ` Grant Likely
2014-10-07 0:14 ` [PATCH 04/13] ACPI: Document ACPI device specific properties Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-13 12:41 ` Grant Likely
2014-10-14 9:42 ` Mika Westerberg
2014-10-07 0:14 ` [PATCH 05/13] misc: at25: Make use of device property API Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-07 9:10 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-10-07 9:32 ` Mika Westerberg
2014-10-07 0:15 ` [PATCH 06/13] gpio / ACPI: Add support for _DSD device properties Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-14 13:44 ` Grant Likely
2014-10-15 8:46 ` Mika Westerberg
2014-10-07 0:15 ` [PATCH 07/13] gpio: sch: Consolidate core and resume banks Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-07 0:16 ` [PATCH 08/13] leds: leds-gpio: Add support for GPIO descriptors Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-07 0:16 ` [PATCH 09/12] input: gpio_keys_polled - " Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-07 17:29 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2014-10-07 0:17 ` [PATCH 10/13] Driver core: Child node properties for devices Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-07 0:18 ` [PATCH 11/13] gpio: Support for unified device properties interface Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-07 10:22 ` Alexandre Courbot
2014-10-07 10:40 ` Mika Westerberg
2014-10-07 10:52 ` Alexandre Courbot
2014-10-08 0:09 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-08 2:55 ` Alexandre Courbot
2014-10-08 14:01 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-07 0:18 ` [PATCH 12/13] leds: leds-gpio: Make use of device property API Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-08 14:04 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-08 17:47 ` Bryan Wu
2014-10-08 22:02 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-07 0:19 ` [PATCH 13/13] input: gpio_keys_polled - " Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-07 17:30 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2014-10-07 0:39 ` [PATCH v4 00/13] Add ACPI _DSD and unified device properties support Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-07 2:28 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2014-10-15 13:04 ` David Woodhouse
2014-10-15 13:15 ` Mark Rutland
2014-10-15 13:28 ` David Woodhouse
2014-10-15 13:42 ` Mark Rutland
2014-10-15 14:08 ` David Woodhouse
2014-10-15 14:46 ` Darren Hart
2014-10-15 15:11 ` David Woodhouse
2014-10-15 15:17 ` Mark Rutland
2014-10-15 15:43 ` Darren Hart
2014-10-16 10:05 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-16 14:55 ` David Woodhouse
2014-10-18 8:37 ` Grant Likely
2014-10-18 8:39 ` Grant Likely
2014-10-18 8:35 ` Grant Likely
2014-10-21 21:50 ` [PATCH v4 00/13] Add ACPI _DSD and unified device properties? support Darren Hart
2015-01-14 18:42 ` [PATCH v4 00/13] Add ACPI _DSD and unified device properties support David Woodhouse
2015-01-15 9:12 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-17 12:01 ` [PATCH v5 00/12] " Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-17 12:03 ` [PATCH v5 01/12] ACPI: Add support for device specific properties Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-17 12:04 ` [PATCH v5 02/12] Driver core: Unified device properties interface for platform firmware Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-20 0:07 ` [Update][PATCH " Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-17 12:05 ` [PATCH v5 03/12] ACPI: Allow drivers to match using Device Tree compatible property Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-20 14:05 ` Grant Likely
2014-10-20 22:19 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-17 12:07 ` [PATCH v5 04/12] misc: at25: Make use of device property API Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-17 12:09 ` [PATCH v5 05/12] gpio / ACPI: Add support for _DSD device properties Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-17 12:10 ` [PATCH v5 06/12] gpio: sch: Consolidate core and resume banks Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-17 12:11 ` [PATCH v5 07/12] leds: leds-gpio: Add support for GPIO descriptors Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-28 15:26 ` Linus Walleij
2014-10-28 21:56 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-29 8:53 ` Mika Westerberg [this message]
2014-10-30 15:40 ` Linus Walleij
2014-10-30 16:15 ` Mika Westerberg
2014-10-31 9:41 ` Linus Walleij
2014-10-31 9:55 ` Mika Westerberg
2014-10-30 15:34 ` Linus Walleij
2014-10-17 12:12 ` [PATCH v5 08/12] input: gpio_keys_polled - " Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-17 12:14 ` [PATCH v5 09/12] Driver core: Unified interface for firmware node properties Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-18 9:35 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-10-19 23:30 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-20 14:14 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-10-18 14:55 ` Grant Likely
2014-10-19 23:46 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-20 14:18 ` Grant Likely
2014-10-20 22:14 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-20 14:19 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-10-20 14:55 ` Grant Likely
2014-10-20 22:22 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-19 22:14 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2014-10-19 23:31 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-20 0:15 ` [Update][PATCH " Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-17 12:16 ` [PATCH v5 10/12] gpio: Support for unified device properties interface Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-17 18:09 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-10-18 9:47 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-10-19 23:58 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-20 14:22 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-10-20 6:12 ` Alexandre Courbot
2014-10-20 14:26 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-10-17 12:17 ` [PATCH v5 11/12] leds: leds-gpio: Make use of device property API Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-17 12:18 ` [PATCH v5 12/12] input: gpio_keys_polled - " Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-17 12:22 ` [PATCH v5 00/12] Add ACPI _DSD and unified device properties support Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-17 15:40 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2014-10-17 19:23 ` Darren Hart
2014-10-17 21:49 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-19 22:14 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2014-10-17 18:04 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-10-17 22:50 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-18 8:49 ` Grant Likely
2014-10-19 23:32 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
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=20141029085306.GI1304@lahna.fi.intel.com \
--to=mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com \
--cc=aaron.lu@intel.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=cooloney@gmail.com \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
--cc=dvhart@linux.intel.com \
--cc=gnurou@gmail.com \
--cc=grant.likely@linaro.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
/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).