Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] dt-bindings: gpio: spacemit: add support for K1 SoC

[Yixun Lan <dlan@gentoo.org>]

hi Linus

Thanks for the ping..

On 10:18 Thu 06 Feb     , Linus Walleij wrote:
> Hi Yixun,
> 
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 5:03 PM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 4:17 AM Yixun Lan <dlan@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >
> > > [Rob]
> > > > If Linux can't handle 1 node for N gpio_chip's, then that's a Linux
> > > > problem. Maybe it can, IDK.
> > >
> > > I haven't seen somthing like this to register 1 node for multi gpio_chips..
> > > To gpio/pinctrl maintainer (Linus Walleij), do you have suggestion on this?
> >
> > For Linux we can call bgpio_init() three times and
> > devm_gpiochip_add_data() three times on the result and if we use the
yes, even I've already done this in v4

> > approach with three cells (where the second is instance 0,1,2 and the
> > last one the offset 0..31) then it will work all just the same I guess?
> >
agree, I just need to connect dots.. parse dts & adjust the driver code

> > foo-gpios <&gpio 2 7 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>;
> >
> > for offset 7 on block 2 for example.
> >
> > We need a custom xlate function I suppose.
> >
> > It just has not been done that way before, everybody just did
> > 2-cell GPIOs.
> 
> does this approach work for you? I think it's the most diplomatic.
> 
I like the approach which make sense

> I'm sorry about the hopeless back-and-forth with the bindings, also
> for contributing to the messy debate. I do want developers to feel
> encouraged to contribute and not get stuck in too long debates.
> 
no problem, thanks for the encouragement..

I planed to go for the implementation, and raise any actual problem I
may find, but it turns out taking more time than I expected (some reason
to due long chinese new year holiday..)

> Yours,
> Linus Walleij

-- 
Yixun Lan (dlan)
Gentoo Linux Developer
GPG Key ID AABEFD55