From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Shevchenko Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: intel: Implement intel_gpio_get_direction callback Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2018 16:59:28 +0200 Message-ID: <1520348368.10722.440.camel@linux.intel.com> References: <20180306134213.16898-1-javier@emutex.com> <3585081b-70af-5c31-08c0-84e96b6055bc@emutex.com> <1520348165.10722.438.camel@linux.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1520348165.10722.438.camel@linux.intel.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Javier Arteaga , Mika Westerberg Cc: Heikki Krogerus , Linus Walleij , linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2018-03-06 at 16:56 +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Tue, 2018-03-06 at 14:31 +0000, Javier Arteaga wrote: > > > +static int intel_gpio_get_direction(struct gpio_chip *chip, > > > unsigned int offset) > > > +{ > > > + if (padcfg0 & PADCFG0_PMODE_MASK) > > > + return -EINVAL; > > Actually we might return direction of GPIO function while pin is in > some > other mode, though it would probably make not much sense in practice. One more though, this is a call back for GPIO function anyway, so, above condition should never happen. I think it's safe to remove it completely. > > > + > > > + return !!(padcfg0 & PADCFG0_GPIOTXDIS); > > > +} -- Andy Shevchenko Intel Finland Oy