[RFC v2 0/5] gpio: add pinctrl based generic gpio driver

[andy.shevchenko at gmail.com]

Thu, Oct 05, 2023 at 11:58:38AM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro kirjoitti:
> This is a revised version of my previous RFC[1]. Although I modified
> the commits to make them look SCMI-independent, they are still posted
> as RFC because I have never tested them on real hardware.
> 
> (background)
> I'm currently working on implementing SCMI pinctrl/gpio drivers
> on U-Boot[2]. Although the pinctrl driver for the kernel[3] was submitted
> by EPAM, it doesn't contain the gpio driver and I believe that we should
> discuss a couple of points on the kernel side to finalize my design for
> U-Boot. 
> 
> So this RFC is intended for reviews, especially to raise some issues.
> 
> 1) how to obtain a value on an input pin
>    All the existing gpio drivers are set to obtain a value on an input
>    pin by accessing the hardware directly. In SCMI case, however, this is
>    just impossible in its nature and must be supported via a protocol
>    using "Input-value" configuration type. (See the spec[4], table-23.)
> 
>    The current pinconf framework is missing the feature (the pinconf
>    parameter and a helper function). See patch#1, #2 and #3.
> 
>    Please note that there is an issue around the pin configuration in
>    EPAM's current pinctrl driver as I commented[5].
> 
> 2) DT bindings
>    I would like to propose a generic binding for pinctrl based gpio driver.
>    This allows a "consumer" driver to handle gpio pins like as other
>    normal gpio controllers support. (patch#5)
> 
> 3) generic GPIO driver
>    Based on (2), I tried to prototype a generic driver in patch#4.
>    Thanks to a set of existing pinctrl_gpio helper functions, except (1),
>    It seems that the driver can be implemented not relying on pin controller
>    specific code, at least for SCMI pinctrl.
> 
> I will appreciate any comments.

Any comment here: I'm listed as a designated reviewer of GPIO patches, why am I
not Cc'ed on this? I definitely have some comments against the code (no DT,
though). Please, use (up-to-date) MAINTAINERS in your v3.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko