From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@gmail.com>,
Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>,
Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@gmail.com>,
Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com>,
Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>,
Benoit Parrot <bparrot@ti.com>,
linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] pinctrl: sh-pfc: Confine legacy function GPIOs to SH
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 12:38:15 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <10481403.sNoQCGtpkA@avalon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1435650327-2542-8-git-send-email-geert+renesas@glider.be>
Hi Geert,
Thank you for the patch.
On Tuesday 30 June 2015 09:45:27 Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Legacy function GPIOs are no longer used on ARM since commit
> a27c5cd1a08cc95c ("sh-pfc: sh73a0: Remove function GPIOs").
> Extract its setup code into a separate function, and make all function
> GPIO related code and data depend on CONFIG_SUPERH.
>
> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>
> ---
> Compile-tested on sh using se7724_defconfig.
> ---
> drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/core.h | 2 ++
> drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/gpio.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/sh_pfc.h | 2 ++
> 3 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/core.h b/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/core.h
> index 4c3c37bf7161804d..c38ace46d7111b0d 100644
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/core.h
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/core.h
> @@ -46,7 +46,9 @@ struct sh_pfc {
> unsigned int nr_gpio_pins;
>
> struct sh_pfc_chip *gpio;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SUPERH
> struct sh_pfc_chip *func;
> +#endif
>
> struct sh_pfc_pinctrl *pinctrl;
> };
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/gpio.c b/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/gpio.c
> index 30654e800580524d..15f4eea186e2ba56 100644
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/gpio.c
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/gpio.c
> @@ -290,6 +290,7 @@ static int gpio_pin_setup(struct sh_pfc_chip *chip)
> * Function GPIOs
> */
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SUPERH
> static int gpio_function_request(struct gpio_chip *gc, unsigned offset)
> {
> static bool __print_once;
> @@ -330,6 +331,31 @@ static int gpio_function_setup(struct sh_pfc_chip
> *chip) return 0;
> }
>
> +static int sh_pfc_add_function_gpios(struct sh_pfc *pfc)
> +{
> + struct sh_pfc_chip *chip;
> +
> + if (!pfc->info->nr_func_gpios)
> + return 0;
> +
> + chip = sh_pfc_add_gpiochip(pfc, gpio_function_setup, NULL);
> + if (IS_ERR(chip))
> + return PTR_ERR(chip);
> +
> + pfc->func = chip;
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static void sh_pfc_remove_function_gpios(struct sh_pfc *pfc)
> +{
> + gpiochip_remove(&pfc->func->gpio_chip);
> +}
> +#else
> +static inline int sh_pfc_add_function_gpios(struct sh_pfc *pfc) { return 0;
> }
> +static inline int sh_pfc_remove_function_gpios(struct sh_pfc *pfc) {
> return 0; }
Given that those functions are only called from a single location, would it
make sense to just compile the calls conditionally instead ? I would find that
slightly more readable as it would be more explicit.
> +#endif
> +
> /*
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -- * Register/unregister
> */
> @@ -397,22 +423,13 @@ int sh_pfc_register_gpiochip(struct sh_pfc *pfc)
> }
>
> /* Register the function GPIOs chip. */
> - if (pfc->info->nr_func_gpios == 0)
> - return 0;
> -
> - chip = sh_pfc_add_gpiochip(pfc, gpio_function_setup, NULL);
> - if (IS_ERR(chip))
> - return PTR_ERR(chip);
> -
> - pfc->func = chip;
> -
> - return 0;
> + return sh_pfc_add_function_gpios(pfc);
> }
>
> int sh_pfc_unregister_gpiochip(struct sh_pfc *pfc)
> {
> gpiochip_remove(&pfc->gpio->gpio_chip);
> - gpiochip_remove(&pfc->func->gpio_chip);
> + sh_pfc_remove_function_gpios(pfc);
>
> return 0;
> }
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/sh_pfc.h
> b/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/sh_pfc.h index c7508d5f688613b2..c6f9163b3e23041f
> 100644
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/sh_pfc.h
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/sh_pfc.h
> @@ -138,8 +138,10 @@ struct sh_pfc_soc_info {
> const struct sh_pfc_function *functions;
> unsigned int nr_functions;
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SUPERH
> const struct pinmux_func *func_gpios;
> unsigned int nr_func_gpios;
> +#endif
>
> const struct pinmux_cfg_reg *cfg_regs;
> const struct pinmux_data_reg *data_regs;
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-30 9:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-30 7:45 [PATCH 0/7] ARM: shmobile: Move gpio ranges from C code to DT Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-06-30 7:45 ` [PATCH 1/7] ARM: shmobile: r8a73a4 dtsi: Add missing "gpio-ranges" to gpio node Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-06-30 9:49 ` Laurent Pinchart
2015-07-14 12:05 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-07-16 9:42 ` Linus Walleij
2015-06-30 7:45 ` [PATCH 2/7] ARM: shmobile: r8a7740 " Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-06-30 9:41 ` Laurent Pinchart
2015-06-30 7:45 ` [PATCH 3/7] ARM: shmobile: sh73a0 " Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-06-30 9:48 ` Laurent Pinchart
2015-06-30 7:45 ` [PATCH 4/7] pinctrl: sh-pfc: Stop calling gpiochip_add_pin_range() on DT platforms Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-06-30 9:30 ` Laurent Pinchart
2015-06-30 9:44 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-06-30 9:54 ` Laurent Pinchart
2015-06-30 7:45 ` [PATCH 5/7] pinctrl: sh-pfc: Remove empty gpio_function_free() Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-06-30 9:34 ` Laurent Pinchart
2015-06-30 7:45 ` [PATCH 6/7] pinctrl: sh-pfc: Move sh_pfc_add_gpiochip() up Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-06-30 9:35 ` Laurent Pinchart
2015-06-30 7:45 ` [PATCH 7/7] pinctrl: sh-pfc: Confine legacy function GPIOs to SH Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-06-30 9:38 ` Laurent Pinchart [this message]
2015-06-30 9:48 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-07-16 9:00 ` [PATCH 0/7] ARM: shmobile: Move gpio ranges from C code to DT Linus Walleij
2015-07-16 9:06 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
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=10481403.sNoQCGtpkA@avalon \
--to=laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com \
--cc=boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com \
--cc=bparrot@ti.com \
--cc=geert+renesas@glider.be \
--cc=gnurou@gmail.com \
--cc=horms@verge.net.au \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=magnus.damm@gmail.com \
--cc=maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com \
/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).