[PATCH RFC 0/2] gpiolib: of: Introduce hook for missing gpio-ranges

Stefan Wahren stefan.wahren at i2se.com
Thu Mar 17 12:23:42 PDT 2022


Hi,

Am 17.03.22 um 18:17 schrieb Florian Fainelli:
> On 3/17/22 4:48 AM, Stefan Wahren wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Am 17.03.22 um 03:02 schrieb Florian Fainelli:
>>>
>>> On 3/16/2022 6:15 PM, Linus Walleij wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 8:44 PM Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren at i2se.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> This patch series tries to provide backward compatibility for DTB which
>>>>> lacks the gpio-ranges property.
>>>>>
>>>>> The commit ("pinctrl: msm: fix gpio-hog related boot issues") by
>>>>> Christian
>>>>> Lamparter already contains a fallback in case the gpio-ranges property
>>>>> is missing. But this approach doesn't work on BCM2835 with a gpio-hog
>>>>> defined for the SoC GPIOs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Based Christian's on explanation i conclude that the fallback must
>>>>> happen
>>>>> during the gpiochip_add() call and not afterwards. So the approach
>>>>> is to
>>>>> call an optional hook, which can be implemented in the platform driver.
>>>>>
>>>>> This series has been tested on Raspberry Pi 3 B Plus.
>>>>>
>>>>> Stefan Wahren (2):
>>>>>     gpiolib: of: Introduce hook for missing gpio-ranges
>>>>>     pinctrl: bcm2835: implement hook for missing gpio-ranges
>>>> Looks good to me, is this something I should apply to the pinctrl
>>>> tree or should I wait for a non-RFC version?
>>> I would be inclined to slap a couple of different Fixes tag to each
>>> commit because breaking older DTBs should IMHO be considered a
>>> regression. So for the first patch I would add:
>>>
>>> Fixes: 2ab73c6d8323 ("gpio: Support GPIO controllers without pin-ranges")
>>>
>>> and for the second patch:
>>>
>>> Fixes: 266423e60ea1 ("pinctrl: bcm2835: Change init order for gpio hogs")
>>>
>>> WDYT?
>> so you consider backporting this "feature"?
> Yes, I would consider your changes fixes actually. If I am the only one
> deeply concerned about backwards compatibility I suppose I could
> backport those into our tree.
i'm fine with backporting, but i thought these must be single 
independent patches.



More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list