From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tony Lindgren Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] pinctrl: single: support GPIO for bits pinctrl Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2015 08:42:05 -0700 Message-ID: <20150706154205.GE10644@atomide.com> References: <1436191025-9024-1-git-send-email-jun.nie@linaro.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from muru.com ([72.249.23.125]:33405 "EHLO muru.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753994AbbGFPmJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Jul 2015 11:42:09 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1436191025-9024-1-git-send-email-jun.nie@linaro.org> Sender: linux-gpio-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org To: Jun Nie Cc: haojian.zhuang@linaro.org, linus.walleij@linaro.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, shawn.guo@linaro.org, wan.zhijun@zte.com.cn, jason.liu@linaro.org * Jun Nie [150706 06:59]: > Support GPIO for one register control multiple pins case > with calculating register offset first, then bit offset. > > Signed-off-by: Jun Nie > --- > drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++---- > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c > index 13b45f2..4f23ef0 100644 > --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c > +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c > @@ -494,7 +494,7 @@ static int pcs_request_gpio(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev, > struct pcs_device *pcs = pinctrl_dev_get_drvdata(pctldev); > struct pcs_gpiofunc_range *frange = NULL; > struct list_head *pos, *tmp; > - int mux_bytes = 0; > + int offset, mux_bytes = 0; > unsigned data; > > /* If function mask is null, return directly. */ > @@ -507,9 +507,23 @@ static int pcs_request_gpio(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev, > || pin < frange->offset) > continue; > mux_bytes = pcs->width / BITS_PER_BYTE; > - data = pcs->read(pcs->base + pin * mux_bytes) & ~pcs->fmask; > - data |= frange->gpiofunc; > - pcs->write(data, pcs->base + pin * mux_bytes); > + if (pcs->bits_per_mux) { > + int pin_pos, byte_num, num_pins_in_register; > + > + num_pins_in_register = pcs->width / pcs->bits_per_pin; > + byte_num = (pcs->bits_per_pin * pin) / BITS_PER_BYTE; > + offset = (byte_num / mux_bytes) * mux_bytes; > + pin_pos = pin % num_pins_in_register; > + pin_pos *= pcs->bits_per_pin; > + data = pcs->read(pcs->base + offset) & > + ~(pcs->fmask << pin_pos); > + data |= (frange->gpiofunc & pcs->fmask) << pin_pos; I don't quite follow you here.. The pcs->fmask is for the whole register, so I think the fmask should be checked the same way in this case also: data = pcs->read(pcs->base + offset) & ~pcs->fmask; ... I don't think we can safely assume the fmask would behave differently in this case. Regards, Tony