[PATCH] pinctrl: pinctrl-imx: fix map setting problem if NO_PAD_CTL

[Hui Wang]

Hui Wang wrote:
> Dong Aisheng wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 03:41:41PM +0800, Hui Wang wrote:
>>> new_map is allocated according to map_num instead of grp->npins,
>>> if a pin or some pins of a group has NO_PAD_CTL property, the map_num
>>> and the grp->npin are different definitely.
>>>
>>> When we set mapping information to the new_map[], we should skip those
>>> pins with NO_PAD_CTL from index, otherwise it is possible the driver
>>> will aceesss to a unallocated region.
>>>
>> Good catching.
>> Thanks.
>>
>>> Cc: Dong Aisheng <dong.aisheng at linaro.org>
>>> Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij at linaro.org>
>>> Cc: Shawn Guo <shawn.guo at linaro.org>
>>> Signed-off-by: Hui Wang <jason77.wang at gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>> This problem is easily reproduced if we set pinctrl in the
>>> ${board}.dts like following:
>>> fsl,pins = <pin_func_id1 config_with_NO_PAD_CTL
>>> pin_func_id2 config_with_NO_PAD_CTL
>>> pin_func_id3 config_normal>;
>>>
>>> drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-imx.c | 9 +++++----
>>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-imx.c 
>>> b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-imx.c
>>> index dd6d93a..0e21abb 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-imx.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-imx.c
>>> @@ -146,6 +146,7 @@ static int imx_dt_node_to_map(struct pinctrl_dev 
>>> *pctldev,
>>> struct pinctrl_map *new_map;
>>> struct device_node *parent;
>>> int map_num = 1;
>>> + int map_pos = 0;
>>> int i;
>>>
>>> /*
>>> @@ -186,11 +187,11 @@ static int imx_dt_node_to_map(struct 
>>> pinctrl_dev *pctldev,
>>> new_map++;
>>> for (i = 0; i < grp->npins; i++) {
>>> if (!(grp->configs[i] & IMX_NO_PAD_CTL)) {
>>> - new_map[i].type = PIN_MAP_TYPE_CONFIGS_PIN;
>>> - new_map[i].data.configs.group_or_pin =
>>> + new_map[map_pos].type = PIN_MAP_TYPE_CONFIGS_PIN;
>>> + new_map[map_pos].data.configs.group_or_pin =
>>> pin_get_name(pctldev, grp->pins[i]);
>>> - new_map[i].data.configs.configs = &grp->configs[i];
>>> - new_map[i].data.configs.num_configs = 1;
>>> + new_map[map_pos].data.configs.configs = &grp->configs[i];
>>> + new_map[map_pos++].data.configs.num_configs = 1;
>> I'm ok with the change, only a minor comment:
>> Does the change as follows look better?
> It is fine to me. Do you need me to prepare a new patch as your 
> suggestion?
>
> Regards,
> Hui.
>> - for (i = 0; i < grp->npins; i++) {
>> + for (i = j = 0; i < grp->npins; i++) {
>> if (!(grp->configs[i] & IMX_NO_PAD_CTL)) {
>> - new_map[i].type = PIN_MAP_TYPE_CONFIGS_PIN;
>> - new_map[i].data.configs.group_or_pin =
>> + new_map[j].type = PIN_MAP_TYPE_CONFIGS_PIN;
>> + new_map[j].data.configs.group_or_pin =
>> pin_get_name(pctldev, grp->pins[i]);
>> - new_map[i].data.configs.configs = &grp->configs[i];
>> - new_map[i].data.configs.num_configs = 1;
>> + new_map[j].data.configs.configs = &grp->configs[i];
>> + new_map[j].data.configs.num_configs = 1;
>> + j++;
Changed it in the v2.

Regards,
Hui.
>>
>> Regards
>> Dong Aisheng
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
>