Re: [PATCH] gpio: omap: make gpio numbering deterministical by using of aliases

[Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@ti.com>]

On 06/23/2016 12:04 PM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 6:16 PM, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> wrote:
> 
>> In general, our use of aliases is rather ill-defined. It would be nicer
>> if we could address devices in a similar manner to disks or partitions,
>> e.g. by path or uuid, but I don't think we have anything sensible we can
>> use there.
>>
>> Given that, I can see the use of an alias to provide a consistent way of
>> referring to a particular gpiochip (and maybe we need to expose the
>> alises information somehow to userspace), but IMO that's independent of
>> any global ID space, probe ordering, etc.
> 
>  From the kernel point of view the way forward to identify and refer to
> a particular gpiochip is using /dev/gpiochipN the character device.
> 
> If complete topology of the bus placement etc is needed, userspace
> can traverse /sys/bus/gpio/*
> 
> This solves the big problem with the current global numbering system
> in /sys/class/gpio/*

Hm. May be i misunderstood samthing (and sry, if my following question
is dummy as I've not followed closely new GPIO ABI development), but..

- from above description it seems that  global numbering system is not really
solved :( instead it's been moved one level up and now the same happens with
gpiocipX devices :( Wouldn't it be reasonable to add possibility to create named/labeled
gpiocipX devices from the very beginning, like: "/dev/gpiocipX[_name|label], or "/dev/gpiocip[_name|label]", or ..

Actually, struct gpio_chip has label field already.

PS. From my experience, the worst case with dev numbering usually happens after 
few insmod/rmmod (or sometimes after suspend/resume) iterations - ttyX ;..(.

> 
> So what this alias should address would be two things:
> 
> - Solve the immediate issue of the global number space for the
>    legacy sysfs ABI, but also:
> 
> - Determine which chip is gpiochip0, gpiochip1, .. etc in the
>    new ABI, so the devices get consistent numbering.
> 
> The latter is lightly frowned upon by the udev people: they think it
> is more proper to traverse /sys to get topological information about
> the devices.
> 
> I would appreciate if a patch to add alias handling would take care
> of both these things if we apply it.
> 

-- 
regards,
-grygorii