[PATCH] OMAP: GPIO: fix _set_gpio_triggering() for OMAP2+

[PATCH] OMAP: GPIO: fix _set_gpio_triggering() for OMAP2+

[Mika Westerberg]

In case on OMAP2+ we call set_24xx_gpio_triggering() instead of
updating reg and l values. However, at the end of the function we
perform a write:

	__raw_writel(l, reg);

So on OMAP2+ we end up writing 0 to the bank->base which is not
correct (typically this points to GPIO_REVISION register).

Fix this by returning immediately after call to
set_24xx_gpio_triggering().

Signed-off-by: Mika Westerberg <ext-mika.1.westerberg@nokia.com>
---
 arch/arm/plat-omap/gpio.c |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-omap/gpio.c b/arch/arm/plat-omap/gpio.c
index c05c653..4dcb66f 100644
--- a/arch/arm/plat-omap/gpio.c
+++ b/arch/arm/plat-omap/gpio.c
@@ -867,7 +867,7 @@ static int _set_gpio_triggering(struct gpio_bank *bank, int gpio, int trigger)
 	case METHOD_GPIO_24XX:
 	case METHOD_GPIO_44XX:
 		set_24xx_gpio_triggering(bank, gpio, trigger);
-		break;
+		return 0;
 #endif
 	default:
 		goto bad;
-- 
1.7.3.2

[PATCH] OMAP: GPIO: fix _set_gpio_triggering() for OMAP2+

[Kevin Hilman]

Mika Westerberg <ext-mika.1.westerberg@nokia.com> writes:

> In case on OMAP2+ we call set_24xx_gpio_triggering() instead of
> updating reg and l values. However, at the end of the function we
> perform a write:
>
> 	__raw_writel(l, reg);
>
> So on OMAP2+ we end up writing 0 to the bank->base which is not
> correct (typically this points to GPIO_REVISION register).
>
> Fix this by returning immediately after call to
> set_24xx_gpio_triggering().
>
> Signed-off-by: Mika Westerberg <ext-mika.1.westerberg@nokia.com>

Acked-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>

Tony, this should be added to omap-for-linus as it fixes a problem in
the recently merged GPIO omap_device/hwmod conversion.

Thanks,

Kevin

> ---
>  arch/arm/plat-omap/gpio.c |    2 +-
>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-omap/gpio.c b/arch/arm/plat-omap/gpio.c
> index c05c653..4dcb66f 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/plat-omap/gpio.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/plat-omap/gpio.c
> @@ -867,7 +867,7 @@ static int _set_gpio_triggering(struct gpio_bank *bank, int gpio, int trigger)
>  	case METHOD_GPIO_24XX:
>  	case METHOD_GPIO_44XX:
>  		set_24xx_gpio_triggering(bank, gpio, trigger);
> -		break;
> +		return 0;
>  #endif
>  	default:
>  		goto bad;

[PATCH] OMAP: GPIO: fix _set_gpio_triggering() for OMAP2+

[Kevin Hilman]

On Tue, 2011-01-04 at 09:52 -0800, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> Mika Westerberg <ext-mika.1.westerberg@nokia.com> writes:
> 
> > In case on OMAP2+ we call set_24xx_gpio_triggering() instead of
> > updating reg and l values. However, at the end of the function we
> > perform a write:
> >
> > 	__raw_writel(l, reg);
> >
> > So on OMAP2+ we end up writing 0 to the bank->base which is not
> > correct (typically this points to GPIO_REVISION register).
> >
> > Fix this by returning immediately after call to
> > set_24xx_gpio_triggering().
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mika Westerberg <ext-mika.1.westerberg@nokia.com>
> 
> Acked-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
> 
> Tony, this should be added to omap-for-linus as it fixes a problem in
> the recently merged GPIO omap_device/hwmod conversion.

On second thought, it's a bit late for the main 2.6.38 window, so will
queue this in my pm-fixes branch for the .38-rc cycle.

Kevin

[PATCH] OMAP: GPIO: fix _set_gpio_triggering() for OMAP2+

[Tony Lindgren]

* Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com> [110104 14:45]:
> On Tue, 2011-01-04 at 09:52 -0800, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> > Mika Westerberg <ext-mika.1.westerberg@nokia.com> writes:
> > 
> > > In case on OMAP2+ we call set_24xx_gpio_triggering() instead of
> > > updating reg and l values. However, at the end of the function we
> > > perform a write:
> > >
> > > 	__raw_writel(l, reg);
> > >
> > > So on OMAP2+ we end up writing 0 to the bank->base which is not
> > > correct (typically this points to GPIO_REVISION register).
> > >
> > > Fix this by returning immediately after call to
> > > set_24xx_gpio_triggering().
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Mika Westerberg <ext-mika.1.westerberg@nokia.com>
> > 
> > Acked-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
> > 
> > Tony, this should be added to omap-for-linus as it fixes a problem in
> > the recently merged GPIO omap_device/hwmod conversion.
> 
> On second thought, it's a bit late for the main 2.6.38 window, so will
> queue this in my pm-fixes branch for the .38-rc cycle.

Yeah let's not mess with omap-for-linus right now, but instead start
queueing up fixes for -rc1.

Tony

[PATCH] OMAP: GPIO: fix _set_gpio_triggering() for OMAP2+

[Varadarajan, Charulatha]

Kevin,

On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 04:47, Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> wrote:
> * Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com> [110104 14:45]:
>> On Tue, 2011-01-04 at 09:52 -0800, Kevin Hilman wrote:
>> > Mika Westerberg <ext-mika.1.westerberg@nokia.com> writes:
>> >
>> > > In case on OMAP2+ we call set_24xx_gpio_triggering() instead of
>> > > updating reg and l values. However, at the end of the function we
>> > > perform a write:
>> > >
>> > > ? __raw_writel(l, reg);
>> > >
>> > > So on OMAP2+ we end up writing 0 to the bank->base which is not
>> > > correct (typically this points to GPIO_REVISION register).
>> > >
>> > > Fix this by returning immediately after call to
>> > > set_24xx_gpio_triggering().
>> > >
>> > > Signed-off-by: Mika Westerberg <ext-mika.1.westerberg@nokia.com>
>> >
>> > Acked-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
>> >
>> > Tony, this should be added to omap-for-linus as it fixes a problem in
>> > the recently merged GPIO omap_device/hwmod conversion.

One clarification - This problem should be existing since the following commit
92105bb70634abacc08bbe12bf6f888fbd7dad38
which was introduced on Sep 7, 2005

FYI, this part of the code remained untouched during GPIO omap_device/hwmod
conversion.

-V Charulatha

>>
>> On second thought, it's a bit late for the main 2.6.38 window, so will
>> queue this in my pm-fixes branch for the .38-rc cycle.
>
> Yeah let's not mess with omap-for-linus right now, but instead start
> queueing up fixes for -rc1.
>
> Tony

[PATCH] OMAP: GPIO: fix _set_gpio_triggering() for OMAP2+

[Kevin Hilman]

Hi Charu,

"Varadarajan, Charulatha" <charu@ti.com> writes:

> On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 04:47, Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> wrote:
>> * Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com> [110104 14:45]:
>>> On Tue, 2011-01-04 at 09:52 -0800, Kevin Hilman wrote:
>>> > Mika Westerberg <ext-mika.1.westerberg@nokia.com> writes:
>>> >
>>> > > In case on OMAP2+ we call set_24xx_gpio_triggering() instead of
>>> > > updating reg and l values. However, at the end of the function we
>>> > > perform a write:
>>> > >
>>> > > ? __raw_writel(l, reg);
>>> > >
>>> > > So on OMAP2+ we end up writing 0 to the bank->base which is not
>>> > > correct (typically this points to GPIO_REVISION register).
>>> > >
>>> > > Fix this by returning immediately after call to
>>> > > set_24xx_gpio_triggering().
>>> > >
>>> > > Signed-off-by: Mika Westerberg <ext-mika.1.westerberg@nokia.com>
>>> >
>>> > Acked-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
>>> >
>>> > Tony, this should be added to omap-for-linus as it fixes a problem in
>>> > the recently merged GPIO omap_device/hwmod conversion.
>
> One clarification - This problem should be existing since the following commit
> 92105bb70634abacc08bbe12bf6f888fbd7dad38
> which was introduced on Sep 7, 2005
>
> FYI, this part of the code remained untouched during GPIO omap_device/hwmod
> conversion.
>

OK, thanks for the clarification.

I had assumed it was recent changes since the patch didn't apply
cleanly, but am glad to be wrong. :)

Kevin

[PATCH] OMAP: GPIO: fix _set_gpio_triggering() for OMAP2+

[Mika Westerberg]

Hi Kevin,

On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 08:54:48AM -0800, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> 
> I had assumed it was recent changes since the patch didn't apply
> cleanly, but am glad to be wrong. :)

The patch should apply cleanly on the latest mainline. Do you want me to
rebase it against some other tree and resend?

Thanks,
MW

[PATCH] OMAP: GPIO: fix _set_gpio_triggering() for OMAP2+

[Kevin Hilman]

Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@iki.fi> writes:

> Hi Kevin,
>
> On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 08:54:48AM -0800, Kevin Hilman wrote:
>> 
>> I had assumed it was recent changes since the patch didn't apply
>> cleanly, but am glad to be wrong. :)
>
> The patch should apply cleanly on the latest mainline. Do you want me to
> rebase it against some other tree and resend?

No, it's fine.  I'll be queueing it for .38-rc2 and it's in my
'fixes-for-tony' branch.

Kevin