From: Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>
To: Karoly Pados <pados@pados.hu>
Cc: Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Loic Poulain <loic.poulain@linaro.org>
Subject: [v4] USB: serial: ftdi_sio: implement GPIO support for FT-X devices
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2018 11:45:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180918094515.GD3943@localhost> (raw)
On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 09:35:35AM +0000, Karoly Pados wrote:
> >> + goto out_free;
> >> +
> >> + /* Chip-type guessing logic based on libftdi. */
> >> + priv->gc.ngpio = 4; /* FT230X, FT231X */
> >> + if (le16_to_cpu(serial->dev->descriptor.bcdDevice) != 0x1000)
> >> + priv->gc.ngpio = 1; /* FT234XD */
> >
> > As I mentioned in my last mail: I've asked FTDI about this, but I fear
> > that FTX234XD has bcdDevice 0x1000 and we may need to just always
> > register all four pins after all.
> >
>
> To avoid missing 4.20, what is the latest time I should wait for FTDI's answer?
> Or should I just submit v5 as it is now and you'll incorporate FTDI's feedback
> when you receive it?
We'll get this into 4.20 either way, there's plenty of time. But I guess
we could play it safe and always register four pins, and if/when we get
more info about FT234XD we can implement registering just one pin in a
follow up patch.
Sounds good? If so I'll just merge your v5 (registering four pins) next
week.
> >> +static void ftdi_gpio_remove(struct usb_serial_port *port)
> >> +{
> >> + struct ftdi_private *priv = usb_get_serial_port_data(port);
> >> +
> >> + if (priv->gpio_used) {
> >> + /* Remark: Exiting CBUS-mode does not reset pin states too */
> >> + ftdi_exit_cbus_mode(port);
> >> + priv->gpio_used = false;
> >> + }
> >
> > This should go after deregistration or we have a tiny race window here.
>
> Can you elaborate on that to make sure I get it right?
> By "deregistration" do you mean deregistering the GPIO chip below in the same method?
Yes.
> Does that mean something can call into our module while this method is running?
> If not, I'm clueless about the possible race here.
Correct, you can get gpio callbacks until the gpio chip has been
deregistered (anything coming in after that would be a gpiolib bug).
Thanks,
Johan
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>
To: Karoly Pados <pados@pados.hu>
Cc: Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Loic Poulain <loic.poulain@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] USB: serial: ftdi_sio: implement GPIO support for FT-X devices
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2018 11:45:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180918094515.GD3943@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ef753ab98cf19ce4482e76864d406c1e@pados.hu>
On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 09:35:35AM +0000, Karoly Pados wrote:
> >> + goto out_free;
> >> +
> >> + /* Chip-type guessing logic based on libftdi. */
> >> + priv->gc.ngpio = 4; /* FT230X, FT231X */
> >> + if (le16_to_cpu(serial->dev->descriptor.bcdDevice) != 0x1000)
> >> + priv->gc.ngpio = 1; /* FT234XD */
> >
> > As I mentioned in my last mail: I've asked FTDI about this, but I fear
> > that FTX234XD has bcdDevice 0x1000 and we may need to just always
> > register all four pins after all.
> >
>
> To avoid missing 4.20, what is the latest time I should wait for FTDI's answer?
> Or should I just submit v5 as it is now and you'll incorporate FTDI's feedback
> when you receive it?
We'll get this into 4.20 either way, there's plenty of time. But I guess
we could play it safe and always register four pins, and if/when we get
more info about FT234XD we can implement registering just one pin in a
follow up patch.
Sounds good? If so I'll just merge your v5 (registering four pins) next
week.
> >> +static void ftdi_gpio_remove(struct usb_serial_port *port)
> >> +{
> >> + struct ftdi_private *priv = usb_get_serial_port_data(port);
> >> +
> >> + if (priv->gpio_used) {
> >> + /* Remark: Exiting CBUS-mode does not reset pin states too */
> >> + ftdi_exit_cbus_mode(port);
> >> + priv->gpio_used = false;
> >> + }
> >
> > This should go after deregistration or we have a tiny race window here.
>
> Can you elaborate on that to make sure I get it right?
> By "deregistration" do you mean deregistering the GPIO chip below in the same method?
Yes.
> Does that mean something can call into our module while this method is running?
> If not, I'm clueless about the possible race here.
Correct, you can get gpio callbacks until the gpio chip has been
deregistered (anything coming in after that would be a gpiolib bug).
Thanks,
Johan
next reply other threads:[~2018-09-18 9:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-18 9:45 Johan Hovold [this message]
2018-09-18 9:45 ` [PATCH v4] USB: serial: ftdi_sio: implement GPIO support for FT-X devices Johan Hovold
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2018-09-18 11:19 [v4] " Johan Hovold
2018-09-18 11:19 ` [PATCH v4] " Johan Hovold
2018-09-18 10:27 [v4] " Karoly Pados
2018-09-18 10:27 ` [PATCH v4] " Karoly Pados
2018-09-18 9:35 [v4] " Karoly Pados
2018-09-18 9:35 ` [PATCH v4] " Karoly Pados
2018-09-18 9:16 [v4] " Johan Hovold
2018-09-18 9:16 ` [PATCH v4] " Johan Hovold
2018-09-16 17:58 [v4] " Karoly Pados
2018-09-16 17:58 ` [PATCH v4] " Karoly Pados
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180918094515.GD3943@localhost \
--to=johan@kernel.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=loic.poulain@linaro.org \
--cc=pados@pados.hu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.