From: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Cc: Christophe LEROY <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: "gpio-line-names" property - issue with commit 9427ecbed46cc
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2017 12:08:27 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171215100827.GU22431@lahna.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACRpkdY22=f0FYVw0AD7eYiyxa6dSNZA8aa6hbyzxZ1wV4bjeA@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 02:37:07PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 12:54 PM, Christophe LEROY
> <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr> wrote:
>
> > Why is it necessary now to set a parent to the GPIO chip whereas it was not
> > necessary before ?
> (...)
> > Is there an easy modification that can be done to your new function
> > devprop_gpiochip_set_names() in order to have the GPIO drivers work as
> > before ?
>
> I am also worried about this.
>
> I have felt that the device property paradigm is too ambitious and assume
> too much about the subtle semantic differences between DT and ACPI
> DSDT. But maybe I'm just whiney.
>
> Looking forward to good ideas on how to solve this!
I think we can fix this by passing struct fwnode_handle to
devprop_gpiochip_set_names(). Then the existing drivers don't need to be
changed and we update of_gpiochip_add() to call it like:
devprop_gpiochip_set_names(chip, of_fwnode_handle(chip->of_node));
or so.
> Mika: is is possible to revert this without breaking something else, if we
> need to?
It breaks ACPI "gpio-line-names" users but I think we don't need to
revert if if do what I'm proposing above :)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-12-15 10:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-12-14 11:54 "gpio-line-names" property - issue with commit 9427ecbed46cc Christophe LEROY
2017-12-14 13:37 ` Linus Walleij
2017-12-15 10:08 ` Mika Westerberg [this message]
2017-12-15 12:31 ` Linus Walleij
2017-12-15 12:39 ` Mika Westerberg
2017-12-15 13:13 ` Christophe LEROY
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=20171215100827.GU22431@lahna.fi.intel.com \
--to=mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com \
--cc=christophe.leroy@c-s.fr \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org \
/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