From: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Kent Gibson <warthog618@gmail.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 2/6] gpiolib: allow to specify the firmware node in struct gpio_chip
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2021 21:25:35 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMRc=Mf5d1i34eBez+pOYjjdyfRL9N_ha_==Cn1rANr=2CB9aQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YaZNyMV5gX5cZpar@smile.fi.intel.com>
On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 5:15 PM Andy Shevchenko
<andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 04:41:23PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > Software nodes allow us to represent hierarchies for device components
> > that don't have their struct device representation yet - for instance:
> > banks of GPIOs under a common GPIO expander. The core gpiolib core
>
> core .. core ?!
>
> > however doesn't offer any way of passing this information from the
> > drivers.
> >
> > This extends struct gpio_chip with a pointer to fwnode that can be set
> > by the driver and used to pass device properties for child nodes.
> >
> > This is similar to how we handle device-tree sub-nodes with
> > CONFIG_OF_GPIO enabled.
>
> Not sure I understand the proposal. Can you provide couple of (simplest)
> examples?
>
> And also it sounds like reinventing a wheel. What problem do you have that you
> need to solve this way?
>
> ...
>
> > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF_GPIO)
> > + if (gc->of_node && gc->fwnode) {
> > + pr_err("%s: tried to set both the of_node and fwnode in gpio_chip\n",
> > + __func__);
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + }
> > +#endif /* CONFIG_OF_GPIO */
>
> I don't like this. It seems like a hack right now.
>
> Is it possible to convert all GPIO controller drivers to provide an fwnode
> rather than doing this? (I believe in most of the drivers we can drop
> completely the of_node assignment).
>
Yes, it's definitely a good idea but I would be careful with just
dropping the of_node assignments as callbacks may depend on them
later. Also it's not just about the gpio_chip of_node assignment -
drivers also use a bunch of OF APIs all around the place. I would
prefer that it be done one by one and every modified driver be tested.
Bart
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-11-30 20:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-11-30 15:41 [PATCH v11 0/6] gpio-sim: configfs-based GPIO simulator Bartosz Golaszewski
2021-11-30 15:41 ` [PATCH v11 1/6] gpiolib: provide gpiod_remove_hogs() Bartosz Golaszewski
2021-11-30 15:41 ` [PATCH v11 2/6] gpiolib: allow to specify the firmware node in struct gpio_chip Bartosz Golaszewski
2021-11-30 16:14 ` Andy Shevchenko
2021-11-30 16:19 ` Andy Shevchenko
2021-11-30 16:55 ` Andy Shevchenko
2021-11-30 18:32 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2021-11-30 20:31 ` Andy Shevchenko
2021-11-30 20:25 ` Bartosz Golaszewski [this message]
2021-11-30 20:59 ` Andy Shevchenko
2021-11-30 21:04 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2021-12-01 13:11 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2021-12-01 13:39 ` Andy Shevchenko
2021-12-01 13:53 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2021-12-01 14:28 ` Andy Shevchenko
2021-12-01 14:33 ` Andy Shevchenko
2021-12-01 14:36 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2021-12-01 14:54 ` Andy Shevchenko
2021-12-02 10:57 ` Andy Shevchenko
2021-12-02 11:24 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2021-12-02 11:35 ` Andy Shevchenko
2021-12-02 11:37 ` Andy Shevchenko
2021-12-02 13:06 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2021-12-02 13:44 ` Andy Shevchenko
2021-12-02 13:52 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2021-12-02 15:40 ` Andy Shevchenko
2021-12-02 17:00 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2021-12-02 17:29 ` Andy Shevchenko
2021-11-30 15:41 ` [PATCH v11 3/6] gpio: sim: new testing module Bartosz Golaszewski
2021-11-30 15:41 ` [PATCH v11 4/6] selftests: gpio: provide a helper for reading chip info Bartosz Golaszewski
2021-11-30 15:41 ` [PATCH v11 5/6] selftests: gpio: add a helper for reading GPIO line names Bartosz Golaszewski
2021-11-30 15:41 ` [PATCH v11 6/6] selftests: gpio: add test cases for gpio-sim Bartosz Golaszewski
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='CAMRc=Mf5d1i34eBez+pOYjjdyfRL9N_ha_==Cn1rANr=2CB9aQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=brgl@bgdev.pl \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=warthog618@gmail.com \
/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).