From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
To: Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@gmail.com>,
"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org>,
Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>,
Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-sunxi <linux-sunxi@googlegroups.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 4/6] net: rfkill: gpio: add device tree support
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 10:35:10 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACRpkdYiy+sya6NqRfAmsrFOXvaa3qX=qjRuTDW1vZVSaG1+Gg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAVeFuLP4MkfXGG1FMauvUw_J63zRXdhGwxqYy5W98L1wCQNbw@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 4:11 AM, Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 8:11 AM, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote:
>> gpio = devm_gpiod_get_index(&pdev->dev, NULL, 0);
>> gpio = devm_gpiod_get_index(&pdev->dev, NULL, 1);
>>
>> Heikki, are you OK with this change?
>>
>> I think this is actually necessary if the ACPI and DT unification
>> pipe dream shall limp forward, we cannot have arguments passed
>> that have a semantic effect on DT but not on ACPI... Drivers
>> that are supposed to use both ACPI and DT will always
>> have to pass NULL as con ID.
>
> I agree that's how it should be be done with the current API if your
> driver can obtain GPIOs from both ACPI and DT. This is a potential
> issue, as drivers are not supposed to make assumptions about who is
> going to be their GPIO provider. Let's say you started a driver with
> only DT in mind, and used gpio_get(dev, con_id) to get your GPIOs. DT
> bindings are thus of the form "con_id-gpio = <phandle>", and set in
> stone. Then later, someone wants to use your driver with ACPI. How do
> you handle that gracefully?
Short answer is you can't. You have to pour backward-compatibility
code into the driver first checking for that property and then falling
back to the new binding if it doesn't exist.
> I'm starting to wonder, now that ACPI is a first-class GPIO provider,
> whether we should not start to encourage the deprecation of the
> "con_id-gpio = <phandle>" binding form in DT and only use a single
> indexed GPIO property per device.
You have a valid point.
> The con_id parameter would then only
> be used as a label, which would also have the nice side-effect that
> all GPIOs used for a given function will be reported under the same
> name no matter what the GPIO provider is.
As discussed earlier in this thread I'm not sure the con_id is
suitable for labelling GPIOs. It'd be better to have a proper name
specified in DT/ACPI instead.
> From an aesthetic point of view, I definitely prefer using con_id to
> identify GPIOs instead of indexes, but I don't see how we can make it
> play nice with ACPI. Thoughts?
Let's ask the DT maintainers...
I'm a bit sceptic to the whole ACPI-DT-API-should-be-unified
just-one-function-call business, as this was just a very simple example
of what can happen to something as simple as
devm_gpiod_get[_index]().
Yours,
Linus Walleij
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-21 9:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-01-17 6:47 [PATCH RFC 0/6] net: rfkill: gpio: Add device tree support Chen-Yu Tsai
2014-01-17 6:47 ` [PATCH RFC 1/6] net: rfkill: gpio: fix gpio name buffer size off by 1 Chen-Yu Tsai
2014-01-17 9:46 ` David Laight
2014-01-17 9:59 ` Chen-Yu Tsai
2014-01-17 6:47 ` [PATCH RFC 2/6] net: rfkill: gpio: use clk_prepare_enable/clk_disable_unprepare Chen-Yu Tsai
2014-01-17 6:47 ` [PATCH RFC 3/6] net: rfkill: gpio: fix reversed clock enable state Chen-Yu Tsai
2014-01-17 6:47 ` [PATCH RFC 4/6] net: rfkill: gpio: add device tree support Chen-Yu Tsai
2014-01-17 16:47 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-01-17 17:43 ` Chen-Yu Tsai
2014-01-17 20:13 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-01-17 23:11 ` Linus Walleij
2014-01-18 4:41 ` Chen-Yu Tsai
2014-01-20 8:10 ` Heikki Krogerus
2014-01-21 3:11 ` Alexandre Courbot
2014-01-21 9:35 ` Linus Walleij [this message]
2014-01-21 12:35 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-01-21 14:53 ` Alexandre Courbot
2014-01-21 15:25 ` Mika Westerberg
2014-01-21 18:50 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-01-22 12:38 ` Mark Brown
2014-01-22 9:54 ` Linus Walleij
2014-01-22 9:58 ` Linus Walleij
2014-01-22 11:00 ` Mika Westerberg
2014-01-27 14:24 ` Maxime Ripard
2014-01-29 4:01 ` [linux-sunxi] " Chen-Yu Tsai
2014-01-17 6:47 ` [PATCH RFC 5/6] net: rfkill: gpio: add clock-frequency device tree property Chen-Yu Tsai
2014-01-17 6:47 ` [PATCH RFC 6/6] ARM: sun7i: cubietruck: enable bluetooth module Chen-Yu Tsai
2014-01-17 20:26 ` [PATCH RFC 0/6] net: rfkill: gpio: Add device tree support Johannes Berg
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='CACRpkdYiy+sya6NqRfAmsrFOXvaa3qX=qjRuTDW1vZVSaG1+Gg@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gnurou@gmail.com \
--cc=heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sunxi@googlegroups.com \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com \
--cc=mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=wens@csie.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).