Re: [PATCH 3/3] [v6] pinctrl: qcom: qdf2xxx: add support for new ACPI HID QCOM8002

[Timur Tabi <timur@codeaurora.org>]

On 12/18/17 8:39 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Ah I missed that the u16 array can't be iterated through. Any
> chance the ACPI tables can be changed to list pin ranges, like
> <33 3>, <90 2>, to indicate that pins 33, 34, 35 and pins 90, 91
> are available?

It's too late.  Firmware is already shipping with the current layout. 
Unfortunately, there's no good peer review process for DSDs that don't 
have a DT equivalent.

> That would allow us to put that into the core
> pinctrl-msm.c file a little better and then only expose pins on
> the gpiochip when call gpiochip_add_pin_range(). If we want to
> support this in DT, I think we would have a DT property like
> available-gpios = <33 3>, <90 2>, <100 34> that we can then
> iterate through and add only these pins to the gpiochip. That's
> better than a bitmap in DT and is still compressed somewhat.

Keep in mind that all this ACPI junk is localized to pinctrl-qdf2xxx. 
pinctrl-msm does not define any new data structures, it just reuses the 
existing one.  You can still define your DT properties any way you want 
in your client drivers.  pinctrl-qdf2xxx is specific to the Centriq chips.

> Without going all the way down into that path, here's my patch to
> make your patch smaller, but perhaps we can just look for the
> ACPI property or the DT property in the pinctrl-msm.c core and
> then add pin ranges directly. Then this ACPI driver doesn't
> really need to change besides for the ID update. We can expose
> all the pins and offsets, etc. from the hardware driver but cut
> out gpios in the core layer in a generic way.

Ok, let me review this.  I don't think there's any gain in moving the 
ACPI processing to pinctrl-msm, however.

-- 
Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm
Technologies, Inc.  Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the
Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.