From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jhovold@gmail.com (Johan Hovold) Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 22:17:02 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: w1-gpio: fix erroneous gpio requests In-Reply-To: References: <1363116094-8630-1-git-send-email-jhovold@gmail.com> <20130312202028.GA6060@kroah.com> Message-ID: <20130312211702.GG8797@localhost> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 04:24:20AM +0800, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > On Mar 13, 2013, at 4:20 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 08:21:34PM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote: > >> Fix regression introduced by commit d2323cf773 ("onewire: w1-gpio: add > >> ext_pullup_enable pin in platform data") which added a gpio entry to the > >> platform data, but did not add the required initialisers to the board > >> files using it. Consequently, the driver would request gpio 0 at probe, > >> which could break other uses of the corresponding pin. > >> > >> On AT91 requesting gpio 0 changes the pin muxing for PIOA0, which, for > >> instance, breaks SPI0 on at91sam9g20. > > not only on AT91, 0 is a valid gpio AT91 (and 9g20) was just an example of what the implications could be like. I discovered the change after having debugged broken MMC on a custom at91sam9g45 board. Johan