From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Javier Martinez Canillas Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] gpio/omap: Add DT support to GPIO driver Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 16:21:58 +0200 Message-ID: References: <1329321854-24490-1-git-send-email-b-cousson@ti.com> <5165CB9D.1090202@wwwdotorg.org> <51671D7B.5060303@wwwdotorg.org> <51673D70.3010503@wwwdotorg.org> <516C31C3.9040505@wwwdotorg.org> <516C7C43.3040105@wwwdotorg.org> <516C8760.2050500@ti.com> <516D9B05.1000501@wwwdotorg.org> <516DA60A.5070000@ti.com> <516DCCA8.3070108@wwwdotorg.org> <516DDB4D.9020500@ti.com> <516E022F.5050708@ti.com> <516EA2B1.3070201@ti.com> <516EA937.8060201@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Return-path: In-Reply-To: <516EA937.8060201@ti.com> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Jon Hunter Cc: Stephen Warren , Linus Walleij , Grant Likely , Alexandre Courbot , Stephen Warren , Kevin Hilman , "devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org" , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Jon Hunter wrote: > > On 04/17/2013 08:42 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 3:25 PM, Jon Hunter wrote: >>> >>> On 04/17/2013 02:55 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: >>> >>> ... >>> >>>> There are so many patches flying around in this thread that I missed it :-) >>>> >>>> Sorry about that... >>> >>> No problem. >>> >>>>> I was trying to see if we could find a common solution that everyone >>>>> could use as it seems that ideally we should all be requesting the gpio. >>>>> >>>>> Cheers >>>>> Jon >>>>> >>>>> [1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-arm-kernel&m=136606204823845&w=1 >>>> >>>> btw, I shared the latest patch with only build testing it, but today I >>>> gave a try and I found a problem with this approach. The .xlate >>>> function is being called twice for each GPIO-IRQ so the first time >>>> gpio_request_one() succeeds but the second time it fails returning >>>> -EBUSY. >>> >>> I tried it and I did not see that. I don't see the below warning either. >>> >> >> weird, I wonder what's different here. > > I am testing on an omap4-sdp which uses a spi based ethernet device. > However, I could try with the omap3430-sdp which uses gpmc. > Thanks, that would be great and it could be a difference. But don't worry I'll to test it more extensively when I have some free time. I just shared here in case you had the same issue. > Cheers > Jon Thanks a lot for your help, Jaiver