[PATCH v2 0/6] ARM: shmobile: Move gpio ranges from C code to DT

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Simon,

On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 2:55 AM, Simon Horman <horms at verge.net.au> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 03:55:13PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> This patch series moves the setup of the GPIO-PFC pin mapping for
>> Renesas PFC/GPIO combos from C code to DT, and does some cleanups.
>> The move to DT is needed to make the GPIO hogging mechanism work, cfr.
>> the discussion following "[PATCH] [RFC] gpio: Retry deferred GPIO
>> hogging on pin range change" (https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/6/16/455).
>>
>> The series consists of 3 parts:
>>   a. Patches 1-3 add the missing "gpio-ranges" properties to the dtsi
>>      files for all affected SoCs,
>>   b. Patch 4 disables the C code to set up the mapping on DT platforms
>>      (it's still needed on SH or ARM-legacy),
>>   c. Patches 5-6 do a few more cleanups in the sh-pfc gpio code.
>>
>> Changes compared to v1 ("[PATCH 0/7] ARM: shmobile: Move gpio ranges
>> from C code to DT",
>> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2015-June/353124.html):
>>   - Add check for CONFIG_OF and pfc->dev->of_node,
>>   - #ifdef out the code instead of introducing helper and dummy
>>     functions,
>>   - Drop "pinctrl: sh-pfc: Move sh_pfc_add_gpiochip() up", as it's no
>>     longer needed due to the #ifdefs,
>>   - Add Acked-by.
>>
>> Dependencies:
>>   - This series applies against renesas-devel-20150803-v4.2-rc5,
>>   - Part a must go in first, to avoid regressions,
>>   - While I didn't notice any bad behavior by having part a only, part b
>>     should go in immediately after part a. Hence I think it's best if
>>     Simon can take this one, too.
>>   - Part c is independent (it doesn't touch the same code), so it can go
>>     in before or after the other parts, or in parallel.
>>
>> Given this fixes the LCD on r8a7740/armadillo, which is a regression
>> introduced by the removal of armadillo-legacy support, I think at least
>> patch 2 should be queued for v4.3.
>>
>> Thanks for applying!
>>
>> Geert Uytterhoeven (6):
>>   ARM: shmobile: r8a73a4 dtsi: Add missing "gpio-ranges" to gpio node
>>   ARM: shmobile: r8a7740 dtsi: Add missing "gpio-ranges" to gpio node
>>   ARM: shmobile: sh73a0 dtsi: Add missing "gpio-ranges" to gpio node
>>   pinctrl: sh-pfc: Stop calling gpiochip_add_pin_range() on DT platforms
>>   pinctrl: sh-pfc: Remove empty gpio_function_free()
>>   pinctrl: sh-pfc: Confine legacy function GPIOs to SH
>
> Where possible I prefer not to apply non-DTS/DTSI patches on top of
> DTS/DTSI patches, I believe this is in keeping with how the ARM SoC

Ugh, that means I have to put a few more DT patches in my queue on the
fast track...

> maintainers like things handled.  With this in mind I have done the following:
>
> 1. Queued up the DTSI patches (patches 1 - 3) for v4.3 in my dt branch.
>    I intend for this to turn up in next soon.
> 2. Queued up for pinctrl patches (patches 4 - 6) for v4.4 in a pinctrl patch.
>    I intend for these to be present in the renesas devel branch but
>    not in next until after the release of v4.3-rc1. I would also be
>    happy to drop them and let Linus Walleij take these patches for v4.4,
>    assuming patches 1 - 3 are accepted for v4.3.

Thanks, that sounds fine to me!

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert at linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds