From: swarren@nvidia.com (Stephen Warren)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH V2 2/3] pinctrl: allow concurrent gpio and mux function ownership of pins
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 17:22:15 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1330993336-9538-2-git-send-email-swarren@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1330993336-9538-1-git-send-email-swarren@nvidia.com>
Per recent updates to Documentation/gpio.txt, gpiolib drivers should
inform pinctrl when a GPIO is requested. pinctrl then marks that pin as
in-use for that GPIO function.
When an SoC muxes pins in a group, it's quite possible for the group to
contain e.g. 6 pins, but only 4 of them actually be needed by the HW
module that's mux'd to them. In this case, the other 2 pins could be
used as GPIOs. However, pinctrl marks all the pins within the group as
in-use by the selected mux function. To allow the expected gpiolib
interaction, separate the concepts of pin ownership into two parts: One
for the mux function and one for GPIO usage. Finally, allow those two
ownerships to exist in parallel.
Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com>
---
v2: New patch.
---
drivers/pinctrl/core.h | 13 ++++----
drivers/pinctrl/pinmux.c | 72 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
2 files changed, 56 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/core.h b/drivers/pinctrl/core.h
index 5b3ff13..2d365a3 100644
--- a/drivers/pinctrl/core.h
+++ b/drivers/pinctrl/core.h
@@ -118,15 +118,15 @@ struct pinctrl_setting {
* @name: a name for the pin, e.g. the name of the pin/pad/finger on a
* datasheet or such
* @dynamic_name: if the name of this pin was dynamically allocated
- * @usecount: If zero, the pin is not claimed, and @owner should be NULL.
+ * @mux_usecount: If zero, the pin is not claimed, and @owner should be NULL.
* If non-zero, this pin is claimed by @owner. This field is an integer
* rather than a boolean, since pinctrl_get() might process multiple
* mapping table entries that refer to, and hence claim, the same group
* or pin, and each of these will increment the @usecount.
- * @owner: The name of the entity owning the pin. Typically, this is the name
- * of the device that called pinctrl_get(). Alternatively, it may be the
- * name of the GPIO passed to pinctrl_request_gpio().
+ * @mux_owner: The name of device that called pinctrl_get().
* @mux_setting: The most recent selected mux setting for this pin, if any.
+ * @gpio_owner: If pinctrl_request_gpio() was called for this pin, this is
+ * the name of the GPIO that "owns" this pin.
*/
struct pin_desc {
struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev;
@@ -134,9 +134,10 @@ struct pin_desc {
bool dynamic_name;
/* These fields only added when supporting pinmux drivers */
#ifdef CONFIG_PINMUX
- unsigned usecount;
- const char *owner;
+ unsigned mux_usecount;
+ const char *mux_owner;
const struct pinctrl_setting_mux *mux_setting;
+ const char *gpio_owner;
#endif
};
diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinmux.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinmux.c
index 86e4017..4e62783 100644
--- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinmux.c
+++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinmux.c
@@ -94,17 +94,28 @@ static int pin_request(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev,
goto out;
}
- if (desc->usecount && strcmp(desc->owner, owner)) {
- dev_err(pctldev->dev,
- "pin already requested\n");
- goto out;
- }
+ if (gpio_range) {
+ /* There's no need to support multiple GPIO requests */
+ if (desc->gpio_owner) {
+ dev_err(pctldev->dev,
+ "pin already requested\n");
+ goto out;
+ }
- desc->usecount++;
- if (desc->usecount > 1)
- return 0;
+ desc->gpio_owner = owner;
+ } else {
+ if (desc->mux_usecount && strcmp(desc->mux_owner, owner)) {
+ dev_err(pctldev->dev,
+ "pin already requested\n");
+ goto out;
+ }
- desc->owner = owner;
+ desc->mux_usecount++;
+ if (desc->mux_usecount > 1)
+ return 0;
+
+ desc->mux_owner = owner;
+ }
/* Let each pin increase references to this module */
if (!try_module_get(pctldev->owner)) {
@@ -135,9 +146,13 @@ static int pin_request(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev,
out_free_pin:
if (status) {
- desc->usecount--;
- if (!desc->usecount)
- desc->owner = NULL;
+ if (gpio_range) {
+ desc->gpio_owner = NULL;
+ } else {
+ desc->mux_usecount--;
+ if (!desc->mux_usecount)
+ desc->mux_owner = NULL;
+ }
}
out:
if (status)
@@ -172,9 +187,11 @@ static const char *pin_free(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev, int pin,
return NULL;
}
- desc->usecount--;
- if (desc->usecount)
- return NULL;
+ if (!gpio_range) {
+ desc->mux_usecount--;
+ if (desc->mux_usecount)
+ return NULL;
+ }
/*
* If there is no kind of request function for the pin we just assume
@@ -185,9 +202,15 @@ static const char *pin_free(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev, int pin,
else if (ops->free)
ops->free(pctldev, pin);
- owner = desc->owner;
- desc->owner = NULL;
- desc->mux_setting = NULL;
+ if (gpio_range) {
+ owner = desc->gpio_owner;
+ desc->gpio_owner = NULL;
+ } else {
+ owner = desc->mux_owner;
+ desc->mux_owner = NULL;
+ desc->mux_setting = NULL;
+ }
+
module_put(pctldev->owner);
return owner;
@@ -493,7 +516,7 @@ static int pinmux_pins_show(struct seq_file *s, void *what)
unsigned i, pin;
seq_puts(s, "Pinmux settings per pin\n");
- seq_puts(s, "Format: pin (name): owner\n");
+ seq_puts(s, "Format: pin (name): mux_owner gpio_owner hog?\n");
mutex_lock(&pinctrl_mutex);
@@ -508,13 +531,16 @@ static int pinmux_pins_show(struct seq_file *s, void *what)
if (desc == NULL)
continue;
- if (desc->owner &&
- !strcmp(desc->owner, pinctrl_dev_get_name(pctldev)))
+ if (desc->mux_owner &&
+ !strcmp(desc->mux_owner, pinctrl_dev_get_name(pctldev)))
is_hog = true;
- seq_printf(s, "pin %d (%s): %s%s", pin,
+ seq_printf(s, "pin %d (%s): %s %s%s", pin,
desc->name ? desc->name : "unnamed",
- desc->owner ? desc->owner : "UNCLAIMED",
+ desc->mux_owner ? desc->mux_owner
+ : "(MUX UNCLAIMED)",
+ desc->gpio_owner ? desc->gpio_owner
+ : "(GPIO UNCLAIMED)",
is_hog ? " (HOG)" : "");
if (desc->mux_setting)
--
1.7.0.4
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-06 0:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-06 0:22 [PATCH V2 1/3] Documentation/gpio.txt: Explain expected pinctrl interaction Stephen Warren
2012-03-06 0:22 ` Stephen Warren [this message]
2012-03-06 10:03 ` [PATCH V2 2/3] pinctrl: allow concurrent gpio and mux function ownership of pins Linus Walleij
2012-03-12 18:24 ` Stephen Warren
2012-03-12 21:42 ` Linus Walleij
2012-03-14 17:29 ` Olof Johansson
2012-03-14 17:27 ` Olof Johansson
2012-03-06 0:22 ` [PATCH V2 3/3] gpio: tegra: Hide tegra_gpio_enable/disable() Stephen Warren
2012-03-06 10:08 ` Linus Walleij
2012-03-06 17:01 ` Stephen Warren
2012-03-06 10:01 ` [PATCH V2 1/3] Documentation/gpio.txt: Explain expected pinctrl interaction Linus Walleij
2012-03-12 17:27 ` Grant Likely
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=1330993336-9538-2-git-send-email-swarren@nvidia.com \
--to=swarren@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).