[PATCH v1 0/8] gpio: Get rid of ARCH_NR_GPIOS (v1)

[PATCH v1 0/8] gpio: Get rid of ARCH_NR_GPIOS (v1)

[Christophe Leroy]

Since commit 14e85c0e69d5 ("gpio: remove gpio_descs global array")
there is no limitation on the number of GPIOs that can be allocated
in the system since the allocation is fully dynamic.

ARCH_NR_GPIOS is today only used in order to provide downwards
gpiobase allocation from that value, while static allocation is
performed upwards from 0. However that has the disadvantage of
limiting the number of GPIOs that can be registered in the system.

To overcome this limitation without requiring each and every
platform to provide its 'best-guess' maximum number, rework the
allocation to allocate from 256 upwards, allowing approx 2 millions
of GPIOs.

In the meantime, add a warning for drivers how are still doing
static allocation, so that in the future the static allocation gets
removed completely and dynamic allocation can start at base 0.

Christophe Leroy (8):
  gpio: aggregator: Stop using ARCH_NR_GPIOS
  gpio: davinci: Stop using ARCH_NR_GPIOS
  gpiolib: Warn on drivers still using static gpiobase allocation
  gpiolib: Get rid of ARCH_NR_GPIOS
  Documentation: gpio: Remove text about ARCH_NR_GPIOS
  x86: Remove CONFIG_ARCH_NR_GPIO
  arm: Remove CONFIG_ARCH_NR_GPIO
  arm64: Remove CONFIG_ARCH_NR_GPIO

 Documentation/driver-api/gpio/legacy.rst |  5 ---
 arch/arm/Kconfig                         | 21 ---------
 arch/arm/include/asm/gpio.h              |  1 -
 arch/arm64/Kconfig                       | 12 ------
 arch/x86/Kconfig                         |  5 ---
 drivers/gpio/gpio-aggregator.c           |  8 ++--
 drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c              |  3 --
 drivers/gpio/gpio-sta2x11.c              |  5 +--
 drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c                   | 13 +++---
 include/asm-generic/gpio.h               | 55 +++++++++---------------
 10 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 92 deletions(-)

-- 
2.37.1

[PATCH v1 1/8] gpio: aggregator: Stop using ARCH_NR_GPIOS

[Christophe Leroy]

ARCH_NR_GPIOS is used locally in aggr_parse() as the maximum number
of GPIOs to be aggregated together by the driver since
commit ec75039d5550 ("gpio: aggregator: Use bitmap_parselist() for
parsing GPIO offsets").

Don't rely on the total possible number of GPIOs in the system but
define a local arbitrary macro for that, set to 512 which should be
large enough as it is also the default value for ARCH_NR_GPIOS.

Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
---
 drivers/gpio/gpio-aggregator.c | 8 +++++---
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-aggregator.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-aggregator.c
index 0cb2664085cf..4548da542ad2 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-aggregator.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-aggregator.c
@@ -56,6 +56,8 @@ static int aggr_add_gpio(struct gpio_aggregator *aggr, const char *key,
 	return 0;
 }
 
+#define AGGREGATOR_MAX_GPIOS 512
+
 static int aggr_parse(struct gpio_aggregator *aggr)
 {
 	char *args = skip_spaces(aggr->args);
@@ -64,7 +66,7 @@ static int aggr_parse(struct gpio_aggregator *aggr)
 	unsigned int i, n = 0;
 	int error = 0;
 
-	bitmap = bitmap_alloc(ARCH_NR_GPIOS, GFP_KERNEL);
+	bitmap = bitmap_alloc(AGGREGATOR_MAX_GPIOS, GFP_KERNEL);
 	if (!bitmap)
 		return -ENOMEM;
 
@@ -84,13 +86,13 @@ static int aggr_parse(struct gpio_aggregator *aggr)
 		}
 
 		/* GPIO chip + offset(s) */
-		error = bitmap_parselist(offsets, bitmap, ARCH_NR_GPIOS);
+		error = bitmap_parselist(offsets, bitmap, AGGREGATOR_MAX_GPIOS);
 		if (error) {
 			pr_err("Cannot parse %s: %d\n", offsets, error);
 			goto free_bitmap;
 		}
 
-		for_each_set_bit(i, bitmap, ARCH_NR_GPIOS) {
+		for_each_set_bit(i, bitmap, AGGREGATOR_MAX_GPIOS) {
 			error = aggr_add_gpio(aggr, name, i, &n);
 			if (error)
 				goto free_bitmap;
-- 
2.37.1

Re: [PATCH v1 1/8] gpio: aggregator: Stop using ARCH_NR_GPIOS

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Christophe,

On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 6:15 PM Christophe Leroy
<christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu> wrote:
> ARCH_NR_GPIOS is used locally in aggr_parse() as the maximum number
> of GPIOs to be aggregated together by the driver since
> commit ec75039d5550 ("gpio: aggregator: Use bitmap_parselist() for
> parsing GPIO offsets").
>
> Don't rely on the total possible number of GPIOs in the system but
> define a local arbitrary macro for that, set to 512 which should be
> large enough as it is also the default value for ARCH_NR_GPIOS.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>

Thanks for your patch!

> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-aggregator.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-aggregator.c
> @@ -56,6 +56,8 @@ static int aggr_add_gpio(struct gpio_aggregator *aggr, const char *key,
>         return 0;
>  }
>
> +#define AGGREGATOR_MAX_GPIOS 512

I would insert this definition at the top, so it is not buried inside the code,
and easier to spot.

> +
>  static int aggr_parse(struct gpio_aggregator *aggr)
>  {
>         char *args = skip_spaces(aggr->args);

The rest LGTM, so
Reviewed-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds

[PATCH v1 2/8] gpio: davinci: Stop using ARCH_NR_GPIOS

[Christophe Leroy]

Since commit 14e85c0e69d5 ("gpio: remove gpio_descs global array")
there is no global limitation anymore on the number of GPIOs in
the system so don't clamp the number of GPIOs with ARCH_NR_GPIOS.

Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
---
 drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c | 3 ---
 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c
index 59c4c48d8296..1018860c83c2 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c
@@ -217,9 +217,6 @@ static int davinci_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 		return -EINVAL;
 	}
 
-	if (WARN_ON(ARCH_NR_GPIOS < ngpio))
-		ngpio = ARCH_NR_GPIOS;
-
 	/*
 	 * If there are unbanked interrupts then the number of
 	 * interrupts is equal to number of gpios else all are banked so
-- 
2.37.1

[PATCH v1 3/8] gpiolib: Warn on drivers still using static gpiobase allocation

[Christophe Leroy]

In the preparation of getting completely rid of static gpiobase
allocation in the future, emit a warning in drivers still doing so.

Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
---
 drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
index cc9c0a12259e..3a6f29eeb72d 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
@@ -715,6 +715,9 @@ int gpiochip_add_data_with_key(struct gpio_chip *gc, void *data,
 		 * a poison instead.
 		 */
 		gc->base = base;
+	} else {
+		dev_warn(&gdev->dev, "Static allocation of GPIO base is "
+				     "deprecated, use dynamic allocation.");
 	}
 	gdev->base = base;
 
-- 
2.37.1

Re: [PATCH v1 3/8] gpiolib: Warn on drivers still using static gpiobase allocation

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 7:18 PM Christophe Leroy
<christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu> wrote:
>
> In the preparation of getting completely rid of static gpiobase
> allocation in the future, emit a warning in drivers still doing so.

...

> +               dev_warn(&gdev->dev, "Static allocation of GPIO base is "
> +                                    "deprecated, use dynamic allocation.");

First of all, do not split string literals. Second, you forgot '\n'.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

Re: [PATCH v1 3/8] gpiolib: Warn on drivers still using static gpiobase allocation

[Christophe Leroy]

Le 30/08/2022 à 22:14, Andy Shevchenko a écrit :
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 7:18 PM Christophe Leroy
> <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu> wrote:
>>
>> In the preparation of getting completely rid of static gpiobase
>> allocation in the future, emit a warning in drivers still doing so.
> 
> ...
> 
>> +               dev_warn(&gdev->dev, "Static allocation of GPIO base is "
>> +                                    "deprecated, use dynamic allocation.");
> 
> First of all, do not split string literals. Second, you forgot '\n'.
> 

Then I get a line longer than 100 chars, is that acceptable ?

Since commit 5fd29d6ccbc9 ("printk: clean up handling of log-levels and 
newlines"), "\n" are just visual pollution, aren't they ?

Christophe

Re: [PATCH v1 3/8] gpiolib: Warn on drivers still using static gpiobase allocation

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Christophe,

On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 7:39 AM Christophe Leroy
<christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu> wrote:
> Le 30/08/2022 à 22:14, Andy Shevchenko a écrit :
> > On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 7:18 PM Christophe Leroy
> > <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu> wrote:
> >> In the preparation of getting completely rid of static gpiobase
> >> allocation in the future, emit a warning in drivers still doing so.
> >
> > ...
> >
> >> +               dev_warn(&gdev->dev, "Static allocation of GPIO base is "
> >> +                                    "deprecated, use dynamic allocation.");
> >
> > First of all, do not split string literals. Second, you forgot '\n'.
>
> Then I get a line longer than 100 chars, is that acceptable ?

Yes it is.  It is a much worse user experience if

    git grep "Static allocation of GPIO base is deprecated"

does not let you find the line that does fit in 100 chars ;-)

> Since commit 5fd29d6ccbc9 ("printk: clean up handling of log-levels and
> newlines"), "\n" are just visual pollution, aren't they ?

The convention is to always add it.  See also commit a0cba2179ea4c182
("Revert "printk: create pr_<level> functions"").

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds

[PATCH v1 4/8] gpiolib: Get rid of ARCH_NR_GPIOS

[Christophe Leroy]

Since commit 14e85c0e69d5 ("gpio: remove gpio_descs global array")
there is no limitation on the number of GPIOs that can be allocated
in the system since the allocation is fully dynamic.

ARCH_NR_GPIOS is today only used in order to provide downwards
gpiobase allocation from that value, while static allocation is
performed upwards from 0. However that has the disadvantage of
limiting the number of GPIOs that can be registered in the system.

To overcome this limitation without requiring each and every
platform to provide its 'best-guess' maximum number, rework the
allocation to allocate upwards, allowing approx 2 millions of
GPIOs.

In order to still allow static allocation for legacy drivers, define
GPIO_DYNAMIC_BASE with the value 256 as the start for dynamic
allocation.

Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
---
 arch/arm/include/asm/gpio.h |  1 -
 drivers/gpio/gpio-sta2x11.c |  5 ++--
 drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c      | 10 +++----
 include/asm-generic/gpio.h  | 55 ++++++++++++++-----------------------
 4 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 43 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/gpio.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/gpio.h
index f3bb8a2bf788..4ebbb58f06ea 100644
--- a/arch/arm/include/asm/gpio.h
+++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/gpio.h
@@ -2,7 +2,6 @@
 #ifndef _ARCH_ARM_GPIO_H
 #define _ARCH_ARM_GPIO_H
 
-/* Note: this may rely upon the value of ARCH_NR_GPIOS set in mach/gpio.h */
 #include <asm-generic/gpio.h>
 
 /* The trivial gpiolib dispatchers */
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-sta2x11.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-sta2x11.c
index e07cca0f8d35..1206b2877caa 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-sta2x11.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-sta2x11.c
@@ -108,8 +108,8 @@ static void gsta_gpio_setup(struct gsta_gpio *chip) /* called from probe */
 	struct gpio_chip *gpio = &chip->gpio;
 
 	/*
-	 * ARCH_NR_GPIOS is currently 256 and dynamic allocation starts
-	 * from the end. However, for compatibility, we need the first
+	 * Dynamic allocation starts at GPIO_DYNAMIC_BASE.
+	 * However, for compatibility, we need the first
 	 * ConneXt device to start from gpio 0: it's the main chipset
 	 * on most boards so documents and drivers assume gpio0..gpio127
 	 */
@@ -129,7 +129,6 @@ static void gsta_gpio_setup(struct gsta_gpio *chip) /* called from probe */
 
 	/*
 	 * After the first device, turn to dynamic gpio numbers.
-	 * For example, with ARCH_NR_GPIOS = 256 we can fit two cards
 	 */
 	if (!gpio_base)
 		gpio_base = -1;
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
index 3a6f29eeb72d..40ebc3d42a78 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
@@ -183,14 +183,14 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpiod_to_chip);
 static int gpiochip_find_base(int ngpio)
 {
 	struct gpio_device *gdev;
-	int base = ARCH_NR_GPIOS - ngpio;
+	int base = GPIO_DYNAMIC_BASE;
 
-	list_for_each_entry_reverse(gdev, &gpio_devices, list) {
+	list_for_each_entry(gdev, &gpio_devices, list) {
 		/* found a free space? */
-		if (gdev->base + gdev->ngpio <= base)
+		if (gdev->base >= base + ngpio)
 			break;
-		/* nope, check the space right before the chip */
-		base = gdev->base - ngpio;
+		/* nope, check the space right after the chip */
+		base = gdev->base + gdev->ngpio;
 	}
 
 	if (gpio_is_valid(base)) {
diff --git a/include/asm-generic/gpio.h b/include/asm-generic/gpio.h
index aea9aee1f3e9..06a817d9de79 100644
--- a/include/asm-generic/gpio.h
+++ b/include/asm-generic/gpio.h
@@ -11,40 +11,18 @@
 #include <linux/gpio/driver.h>
 #include <linux/gpio/consumer.h>
 
-/* Platforms may implement their GPIO interface with library code,
+/*
+ * Platforms may implement their GPIO interface with library code,
  * at a small performance cost for non-inlined operations and some
  * extra memory (for code and for per-GPIO table entries).
- *
- * While the GPIO programming interface defines valid GPIO numbers
- * to be in the range 0..MAX_INT, this library restricts them to the
- * smaller range 0..ARCH_NR_GPIOS-1.
- *
- * ARCH_NR_GPIOS is somewhat arbitrary; it usually reflects the sum of
- * builtin/SoC GPIOs plus a number of GPIOs on expanders; the latter is
- * actually an estimate of a board-specific value.
  */
 
-#ifndef ARCH_NR_GPIOS
-#if defined(CONFIG_ARCH_NR_GPIO) && CONFIG_ARCH_NR_GPIO > 0
-#define ARCH_NR_GPIOS CONFIG_ARCH_NR_GPIO
-#else
-#define ARCH_NR_GPIOS		512
-#endif
-#endif
-
 /*
- * "valid" GPIO numbers are nonnegative and may be passed to
- * setup routines like gpio_request().  only some valid numbers
- * can successfully be requested and used.
- *
- * Invalid GPIO numbers are useful for indicating no-such-GPIO in
- * platform data and other tables.
+ * At the end we want all GPIOs to be dynamically allocated from 0.
+ * However, some legacy drivers still perform fixed allocation.
+ * Until they are all fixed, leave 0-256 space for them.
  */
-
-static inline bool gpio_is_valid(int number)
-{
-	return number >= 0 && number < ARCH_NR_GPIOS;
-}
+#define GPIO_DYNAMIC_BASE	256
 
 struct device;
 struct gpio;
@@ -140,12 +118,6 @@ static inline void gpio_unexport(unsigned gpio)
 
 #include <linux/kernel.h>
 
-static inline bool gpio_is_valid(int number)
-{
-	/* only non-negative numbers are valid */
-	return number >= 0;
-}
-
 /* platforms that don't directly support access to GPIOs through I2C, SPI,
  * or other blocking infrastructure can use these wrappers.
  */
@@ -169,4 +141,19 @@ static inline void gpio_set_value_cansleep(unsigned gpio, int value)
 
 #endif /* !CONFIG_GPIOLIB */
 
+/*
+ * "valid" GPIO numbers are nonnegative and may be passed to
+ * setup routines like gpio_request().  only some valid numbers
+ * can successfully be requested and used.
+ *
+ * Invalid GPIO numbers are useful for indicating no-such-GPIO in
+ * platform data and other tables.
+ */
+
+static inline bool gpio_is_valid(int number)
+{
+	/* only non-negative numbers are valid */
+	return number >= 0;
+}
+
 #endif /* _ASM_GENERIC_GPIO_H */
-- 
2.37.1

Re: [PATCH v1 4/8] gpiolib: Get rid of ARCH_NR_GPIOS

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 7:19 PM Christophe Leroy
<christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu> wrote:
>
> Since commit 14e85c0e69d5 ("gpio: remove gpio_descs global array")
> there is no limitation on the number of GPIOs that can be allocated
> in the system since the allocation is fully dynamic.
>
> ARCH_NR_GPIOS is today only used in order to provide downwards
> gpiobase allocation from that value, while static allocation is
> performed upwards from 0. However that has the disadvantage of
> limiting the number of GPIOs that can be registered in the system.
>
> To overcome this limitation without requiring each and every
> platform to provide its 'best-guess' maximum number, rework the
> allocation to allocate upwards, allowing approx 2 millions of
> GPIOs.
>
> In order to still allow static allocation for legacy drivers, define
> GPIO_DYNAMIC_BASE with the value 256 as the start for dynamic
> allocation.

Not sure about 256, but I understand that this can only be the best guess.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

Re: [PATCH v1 4/8] gpiolib: Get rid of ARCH_NR_GPIOS

[Christophe Leroy]

Le 30/08/2022 à 22:18, Andy Shevchenko a écrit :
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 7:19 PM Christophe Leroy
> <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu> wrote:
>>
>> Since commit 14e85c0e69d5 ("gpio: remove gpio_descs global array")
>> there is no limitation on the number of GPIOs that can be allocated
>> in the system since the allocation is fully dynamic.
>>
>> ARCH_NR_GPIOS is today only used in order to provide downwards
>> gpiobase allocation from that value, while static allocation is
>> performed upwards from 0. However that has the disadvantage of
>> limiting the number of GPIOs that can be registered in the system.
>>
>> To overcome this limitation without requiring each and every
>> platform to provide its 'best-guess' maximum number, rework the
>> allocation to allocate upwards, allowing approx 2 millions of
>> GPIOs.
>>
>> In order to still allow static allocation for legacy drivers, define
>> GPIO_DYNAMIC_BASE with the value 256 as the start for dynamic
>> allocation.
> 
> Not sure about 256, but I understand that this can only be the best guess.
> 

Well, it's already just a precaution. Linus W's expectation is that 
static ones are allocated at first, they should already be allocated 
when we start doing dynamic allocations so he was even thinking that we 
could have started at 0 already.

But I can start higher if you think it is safer, maybe at 512 which is 
the default ARCH_NR_GPIOS today.

Re: [PATCH v1 4/8] gpiolib: Get rid of ARCH_NR_GPIOS

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Wed, Aug 31, 2022, at 7:49 AM, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> Le 30/08/2022 à 22:18, Andy Shevchenko a écrit :
>> On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 7:19 PM Christophe Leroy
>> <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu> wrote:
>>>
>>> Since commit 14e85c0e69d5 ("gpio: remove gpio_descs global array")
>>> there is no limitation on the number of GPIOs that can be allocated
>>> in the system since the allocation is fully dynamic.
>>>
>>> ARCH_NR_GPIOS is today only used in order to provide downwards
>>> gpiobase allocation from that value, while static allocation is
>>> performed upwards from 0. However that has the disadvantage of
>>> limiting the number of GPIOs that can be registered in the system.
>>>
>>> To overcome this limitation without requiring each and every
>>> platform to provide its 'best-guess' maximum number, rework the
>>> allocation to allocate upwards, allowing approx 2 millions of
>>> GPIOs.
>>>
>>> In order to still allow static allocation for legacy drivers, define
>>> GPIO_DYNAMIC_BASE with the value 256 as the start for dynamic
>>> allocation.
>> 
>> Not sure about 256, but I understand that this can only be the best guess.
>> 
>
> Well, it's already just a precaution. Linus W's expectation is that 
> static ones are allocated at first, they should already be allocated 
> when we start doing dynamic allocations so he was even thinking that we 
> could have started at 0 already.
>
> But I can start higher if you think it is safer, maybe at 512 which is 
> the default ARCH_NR_GPIOS today.

FWIW, I went through the drivers that set the base to a value other than
zero or -1, to see what they use:

arch/arm/common/scoop.c:		devptr->gpio.base = inf->gpio_base; // 204
arch/arm/mach-s3c/gpio-samsung.c:			.base	= S3C2410_GPM(0), // 384
arch/arm/mach-s3c/gpio-samsung.c:			.base	= S3C64XX_GPQ(0), // 197
arch/arm/mach-s3c/mach-h1940.c:	.base			= H1940_LATCH_GPIO(0), // 384 + 22
arch/arm/mach-sa1100/simpad.c:	cs3_gpio.base = SIMPAD_CS3_GPIO_BASE; // 27 + 11
arch/arm/plat-orion/gpio.c:	ochip->chip.base = gpio_base; // 64 + 32
arch/mips/alchemy/common/gpiolib.c:		.base			= ALCHEMY_GPIO2_BASE, // 32 + 16
arch/mips/alchemy/common/gpiolib.c:	.base			= AU1300_GPIO_BASE, // 0 + 75
arch/mips/kernel/gpio_txx9.c:	txx9_gpio_chip.base = base; // 0 + 16
arch/mips/txx9/generic/setup.c:	iocled->chip.base = basenum; -1
drivers/bcma/driver_gpio.c:		chip->base		= bus->num * BCMA_GPIO_MAX_PINS; // probably 0
drivers/gpio/gpio-adp5520.c:	gc->base = pdata->gpio_start; // unused
drivers/gpio/gpio-adp5588.c:		gc->base = pdata->gpio_start; // unused
drivers/gpio/gpio-arizona.c:		arizona_gpio->gpio_chip.base = pdata->gpio_base; // 197
drivers/gpio/gpio-brcmstb.c:		gc->base = gpio_base; // 2 * 32
drivers/gpio/gpio-bt8xx.c:	c->base = modparam_gpiobase; // from modprobe
drivers/gpio/gpio-da9052.c:		gpio->gp.base = pdata->gpio_base; // unused
drivers/gpio/gpio-da9055.c:		gpio->gp.base = pdata->gpio_base; // unused
drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c:	chips->chip.base = pdata->no_auto_base ? pdata->base : -1; // 0 + 144
drivers/gpio/gpio-dwapb.c:	port->gc.base = pp->gpio_base; // from DT, deprecated
drivers/gpio/gpio-f7188x.c:			.base             = _base,			\ // 10*10, unused
drivers/gpio/gpio-htc-egpio.c:		chip->base            = pdata->chip[i].gpio_base; // 192 + 5 * 8
drivers/gpio/gpio-ich.c:	chip->base = modparam_gpiobase; // from modprobe
drivers/gpio/gpio-kempld.c:		chip->base = pdata->gpio_base; // 0
drivers/gpio/gpio-lpc32xx.c:			.base			= LPC32XX_GPO_P3_GRP, // 104
drivers/gpio/gpio-madera.c:		madera_gpio->gpio_chip.base = pdata->gpio_base; // -1
drivers/gpio/gpio-max730x.c:		ts->chip.base = pdata->base; // 200 + 28 (timberdale)
drivers/gpio/gpio-max732x.c:	gc->base = gpio_start; // 192
drivers/gpio/gpio-mc33880.c:	mc->chip.base = pdata->base; // 100 (timberdale)
drivers/gpio/gpio-merrifield.c:	priv->chip.base = gpio_base; // 0 + 213
drivers/gpio/gpio-mmio.c:		gc->base = pdata->base; // 197 + 32
drivers/gpio/gpio-mockup.c:	gc->base = base; // module parama
drivers/gpio/gpio-mvebu.c:	mvchip->chip.base = id * MVEBU_MAX_GPIO_PER_BANK; // 4 * 32, from DT
drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c:		bank->chip.base = OMAP_MPUIO(0); // 192
drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c:		bank->chip.base = gpio; // 7 * 32
drivers/gpio/gpio-palmas.c:		palmas_gpio->gpio_chip.base = palmas_pdata->gpio_base; // unused
drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c:	gc->base = chip->gpio_start; // ???? used a lot
drivers/gpio/gpio-pcf857x.c:	gpio->chip.base			= pdata ? pdata->gpio_base : -1; // 160
drivers/gpio/gpio-rc5t583.c:		rc5t583_gpio->gpio_chip.base = pdata->gpio_base;  // unused
drivers/gpio/gpio-rockchip.c:	gc->base = bank->pin_base; // 8 * 32
drivers/gpio/gpio-sch311x.c:		block->chip.base = sch311x_gpio_blocks[i].base; // 6 * 10
drivers/gpio/gpio-sta2x11.c:	gpio->base = gpio_base; // unused 
drivers/gpio/gpio-timberdale.c:	gc->base = pdata->gpio_base; // 0 + 100
drivers/gpio/gpio-tps6586x.c:		tps6586x_gpio->gpio_chip.base = pdata->gpio_base; // -1
drivers/gpio/gpio-tps65910.c:		tps65910_gpio->gpio_chip.base = pdata->gpio_base; // -1
drivers/gpio/gpio-ucb1400.c:	ucb->gc.base = ucb->gpio_offset; // 0
drivers/gpio/gpio-wm831x.c:		wm831x_gpio->gpio_chip.base = pdata->gpio_base; // 197 + 64
drivers/gpio/gpio-wm8350.c:		wm8350_gpio->gpio_chip.base = pdata->gpio_base; // 0
drivers/gpio/gpio-wm8994.c:		wm8994_gpio->gpio_chip.base = pdata->gpio_base; 197 + 8
drivers/input/keyboard/adp5588-keys.c:	kpad->gc.base = gpio_data->gpio_start; // unused
drivers/input/keyboard/adp5589-keys.c:	kpad->gc.base = gpio_data->gpio_start; // unused
drivers/leds/leds-pca9532.c:		data->gpio.base = pdata->gpio_base; // unused
drivers/leds/leds-tca6507.c:	tca->gpio.base = pdata->gpio_base; // unused
drivers/mfd/asic3.c:	asic->gpio.base = pdata->gpio_base; // 300 + 100
drivers/mfd/htc-i2cpld.c:	gpio_chip->base            = plat_chip_data->gpio_in_base; // 192 + 16 + 8*8
drivers/mfd/sm501.c:	gchip->base   = base; // 0
drivers/mfd/tps65010.c:		tps->chip.base = board->base; // 204
drivers/mfd/ucb1x00-core.c:		ucb->gpio.base = pdata->gpio_base; // 27 + 13
drivers/pinctrl/nomadik/pinctrl-nomadik.c:	chip->base = id * NMK_GPIO_PER_CHIP; // 9 * 32
drivers/pinctrl/nuvoton/pinctrl-npcm7xx.c:		pctrl->gpio_bank[id].gc.base = args.args[1]; // 8*32, from DT
drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91.c:	chip->base = alias_idx * MAX_NB_GPIO_PER_BANK; // 5*32
drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c:	jzgc->gc.base = bank * 32; // 6 * 32, from DT
drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-mcp23s08.c:	mcp->chip.base = base; // -1
drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-oxnas.c:			.base = GPIO_BANK_START(_bank),	// 2*32
drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-pic32.c:			.base = GPIO_BANK_START(_bank), // 10 * 16
drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-pistachio.c:			.base = _pin_base,	// 9 * 16
drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c:	bank->gpio_chip.base = bank_num * ST_GPIO_PINS_PER_BANK; // 26 * 8
drivers/pinctrl/renesas/gpio.c:	gc->base = pfc->nr_gpio_pins; // ??? don't understand
drivers/pinctrl/samsung/pinctrl-samsung.c:		gc->base = bank->grange.base;
drivers/pinctrl/stm32/pinctrl-stm32.c:		bank->gpio_chip.base = args.args[1];
drivers/pinctrl/stm32/pinctrl-stm32.c:		bank->gpio_chip.base = bank_nr * STM32_GPIO_PINS_PER_BANK;
drivers/pinctrl/stm32/pinctrl-stm32.c:	bank->gpio_chip.base = bank_nr * STM32_GPIO_PINS_PER_BANK;
drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-sunxi.c:	pctl->chip->base = pctl->desc->pin_base;
sound/soc/codecs/wm5100.c:		wm5100->gpio_chip.base = wm5100->pdata.gpio_base; // 197 + 8 + 6
sound/soc/codecs/wm8903.c:		wm8903->gpio_chip.base = pdata->gpio_base; // 197 + 8
sound/soc/codecs/wm8962.c:		wm8962->gpio_chip.base = pdata->gpio_base; // 197 + 8 
sound/soc/codecs/wm8996.c:		wm8996->gpio_chip.base = wm8996->pdata.gpio_base; // 197 + 8 

     Arnd

Re: [PATCH v1 4/8] gpiolib: Get rid of ARCH_NR_GPIOS

[Christophe Leroy]

Le 31/08/2022 à 22:55, Arnd Bergmann a écrit :
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2022, at 7:49 AM, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>> Le 30/08/2022 à 22:18, Andy Shevchenko a écrit :
>>> On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 7:19 PM Christophe Leroy
>>> <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Since commit 14e85c0e69d5 ("gpio: remove gpio_descs global array")
>>>> there is no limitation on the number of GPIOs that can be allocated
>>>> in the system since the allocation is fully dynamic.
>>>>
>>>> ARCH_NR_GPIOS is today only used in order to provide downwards
>>>> gpiobase allocation from that value, while static allocation is
>>>> performed upwards from 0. However that has the disadvantage of
>>>> limiting the number of GPIOs that can be registered in the system.
>>>>
>>>> To overcome this limitation without requiring each and every
>>>> platform to provide its 'best-guess' maximum number, rework the
>>>> allocation to allocate upwards, allowing approx 2 millions of
>>>> GPIOs.
>>>>
>>>> In order to still allow static allocation for legacy drivers, define
>>>> GPIO_DYNAMIC_BASE with the value 256 as the start for dynamic
>>>> allocation.
>>>
>>> Not sure about 256, but I understand that this can only be the best guess.
>>>
>>
>> Well, it's already just a precaution. Linus W's expectation is that
>> static ones are allocated at first, they should already be allocated
>> when we start doing dynamic allocations so he was even thinking that we
>> could have started at 0 already.
>>
>> But I can start higher if you think it is safer, maybe at 512 which is
>> the default ARCH_NR_GPIOS today.
> 
> FWIW, I went through the drivers that set the base to a value other than
> zero or -1, to see what they use:
> 

> arch/arm/mach-s3c/gpio-samsung.c:			.base	= S3C2410_GPM(0), // 384

> arch/arm/mach-s3c/mach-h1940.c:	.base			= H1940_LATCH_GPIO(0), // 384 + 22

> drivers/mfd/asic3.c:	asic->gpio.base = pdata->gpio_base; // 300 + 100
> drivers/mfd/htc-i2cpld.c:	gpio_chip->base            = plat_chip_data->gpio_in_base; // 192 + 16 + 8*8


Ok, so 256 is not enough, have to go to 512.

Christophe

Re: [PATCH v1 4/8] gpiolib: Get rid of ARCH_NR_GPIOS

[Andy Shevchenko]

(Nuno, one point below for you)

On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 11:55 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:

...

> drivers/gpio/gpio-adp5520.c:    gc->base = pdata->gpio_start; // unused
> drivers/gpio/gpio-adp5588.c:            gc->base = pdata->gpio_start; // unused
> drivers/input/keyboard/adp5588-keys.c:  kpad->gc.base = gpio_data->gpio_start; // unused
> drivers/input/keyboard/adp5589-keys.c:  kpad->gc.base = gpio_data->gpio_start; // unused

I believe we should convert them to -1.

> drivers/gpio/gpio-bt8xx.c:      c->base = modparam_gpiobase; // from modprobe
> drivers/gpio/gpio-ich.c:        chip->base = modparam_gpiobase; // from modprobe

I believe it was designed for Intel hardware and so it can't be higher
than 512 - ngpios, where the latter one is small enough (dozen or a
couple of dozens of pins).

> drivers/gpio/gpio-dwapb.c:      port->gc.base = pp->gpio_base; // from DT, deprecated

From board files, since some platforms expect a fixed number for it.

> drivers/gpio/gpio-mockup.c:     gc->base = base; // module parama

This is for testing, so the test cases should be amended accordingly.
But I think the module itself is deprecated, and gpio-sim seems not
using it as a modprobe parameter, but rather as configfs.

> drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c:    gc->base = chip->gpio_start; // ???? used a lot

To answer this one needs to go via all board files (most of them ARM
32-bit based) and look, but it means almost the same case as per Intel
above: 512-ngpios.

> drivers/pinctrl/renesas/gpio.c: gc->base = pfc->nr_gpio_pins; // ??? don't understand

I think, w/o looking into the code, that this just guarantees the
continuous numbering for all banks (chips) on the platform.

> drivers/pinctrl/stm32/pinctrl-stm32.c:          bank->gpio_chip.base = args.args[1];

Device Tree?!

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

Re: [PATCH v1 4/8] gpiolib: Get rid of ARCH_NR_GPIOS

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Andy,

CC linux-sh

On Fri, Sep 2, 2022 at 12:53 PM Andy Shevchenko
<andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 11:55 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> > drivers/pinctrl/renesas/gpio.c: gc->base = pfc->nr_gpio_pins; // ??? don't understand
>
> I think, w/o looking into the code, that this just guarantees the
> continuous numbering for all banks (chips) on the platform.

This part of the code depends on CONFIG_PINCTRL_SH_FUNC_GPIO,
which is used only on SH.

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds

Re: [PATCH v1 4/8] gpiolib: Get rid of ARCH_NR_GPIOS

[Nuno Sá]

On Fri, 2022-09-02 at 13:52 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> (Nuno, one point below for you)
> 
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 11:55 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> 
> ...
> 
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-adp5520.c:    gc->base = pdata->gpio_start; //
> > unused
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-adp5588.c:            gc->base = pdata-
> > >gpio_start; // unused
> > drivers/input/keyboard/adp5588-keys.c:  kpad->gc.base = gpio_data-
> > >gpio_start; // unused
> > drivers/input/keyboard/adp5589-keys.c:  kpad->gc.base = gpio_data-
> > >gpio_start; // unused
> 
> I believe we should convert them to -1.
> 

Well, the adp5588-keys.c was already refactored [1] to use FW
properties so that -1 will be used. In the process, gpio-adp5588.c
was dropped.

For the adp5589-keys.c driver, we might also need to do a similar
work as I suspect there's no platform making use of pdata. Hence,
yes, I believe -1 is the way to go.

Ditto for gpio-adp5520.c...

[1]:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-input/Yw7hRIbsTqOWVeyJ@google.com/T/#m382bec5c587241010d453ce1000bea2d34b86380

- Nuno Sá
> 

Re: [PATCH v1 4/8] gpiolib: Get rid of ARCH_NR_GPIOS

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Fri, Sep 2, 2022, at 12:52 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 11:55 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
>
> ...
>
>> drivers/gpio/gpio-adp5520.c:    gc->base = pdata->gpio_start; // unused
>> drivers/gpio/gpio-adp5588.c:            gc->base = pdata->gpio_start; // unused
>> drivers/input/keyboard/adp5588-keys.c:  kpad->gc.base = gpio_data->gpio_start; // unused
>> drivers/input/keyboard/adp5589-keys.c:  kpad->gc.base = gpio_data->gpio_start; // unused
>
> I believe we should convert them to -1.

This is probably something we should do separately, but a lot of the
drivers currently don't have support for probing from DT or any other
firmware interface but rely on platform_data definitions from a
board file that was never part of the upstream kernel.

We are going to remove a lot more board files early next year,
and I was hoping to follow up with a treewide cleanup of such
drivers and remove a lot of them entirely.

>> drivers/gpio/gpio-dwapb.c:      port->gc.base = pp->gpio_base; // from DT, deprecated
>
> From board files, since some platforms expect a fixed number for it.

>> drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c:    gc->base = chip->gpio_start; // ???? used a lot
>
> To answer this one needs to go via all board files (most of them ARM
> 32-bit based) and look, but it means almost the same case as per Intel
> above: 512-ngpios.

Right, I went through all the board files the other drivers,
this one just happens to be used more than the others:

arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-da850-evm.c:#include <linux/platform_data/pca953x.h>
arch/arm/mach-ep93xx/vision_ep9307.c:#include <linux/platform_data/pca953x.h>
arch/arm/mach-mmp/ttc_dkb.c:#include <linux/platform_data/pca953x.h>
arch/arm/mach-pxa/cm-x300.c:#include <linux/platform_data/pca953x.h>
arch/arm/mach-pxa/spitz.c:#include <linux/platform_data/pca953x.h>
arch/arm/mach-pxa/zeus.c:#include <linux/platform_data/pca953x.h>
arch/arm/mach-pxa/zylonite_pxa300.c:#include <linux/platform_data/pca953x.h>
arch/arm/mach-s3c/mach-crag6410.c:#include <linux/platform_data/pca953x.h>

The only ones that have known users though are crag6410
and vision_ep9307, the other ones will be removed.

Vision-ep9307 has 128 GPIOs total, crag6410 is complicated because it
many different GPIO controllers in various combinations.

>> drivers/pinctrl/renesas/gpio.c: gc->base = pfc->nr_gpio_pins; // ??? don't understand
>
> I think, w/o looking into the code, that this just guarantees the
> continuous numbering for all banks (chips) on the platform.

Yes, that seems to be the idea most of the pinctrl drivers.

      Arnd

[PATCH v1 5/8] Documentation: gpio: Remove text about ARCH_NR_GPIOS

[Christophe Leroy]

ARCH_NR_GPIOS have been removed, clean up the documentation.

After this patch, the only place when ARCH_NR_GPIOS remains is in
translations/zh_CN/gpio.txt and translations/zh_TW/gpio.txt.
I don't have the skills to update that, anyway those two files are
already out of sync as they are still mentionning ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB
which was removed by commit 65053e1a7743 ("gpio: delete
ARCH_[WANTS_OPTIONAL|REQUIRE]_GPIOLIB")

Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
---
 Documentation/driver-api/gpio/legacy.rst | 5 -----
 1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/driver-api/gpio/legacy.rst b/Documentation/driver-api/gpio/legacy.rst
index 9b12eeb89170..e17910cc3271 100644
--- a/Documentation/driver-api/gpio/legacy.rst
+++ b/Documentation/driver-api/gpio/legacy.rst
@@ -558,11 +558,6 @@ Platform Support
 To force-enable this framework, a platform's Kconfig will "select" GPIOLIB,
 else it is up to the user to configure support for GPIO.
 
-It may also provide a custom value for ARCH_NR_GPIOS, so that it better
-reflects the number of GPIOs in actual use on that platform, without
-wasting static table space.  (It should count both built-in/SoC GPIOs and
-also ones on GPIO expanders.
-
 If neither of these options are selected, the platform does not support
 GPIOs through GPIO-lib and the code cannot be enabled by the user.
 
-- 
2.37.1

[PATCH v1 6/8] x86: Remove CONFIG_ARCH_NR_GPIO

[Christophe Leroy]

CONFIG_ARCH_NR_GPIO is not used anymore, remove it.

Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
---
 arch/x86/Kconfig | 5 -----
 1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig
index f9920f1341c8..0385d5273e37 100644
--- a/arch/x86/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig
@@ -345,11 +345,6 @@ config ARCH_HAS_CPU_RELAX
 config ARCH_HIBERNATION_POSSIBLE
 	def_bool y
 
-config ARCH_NR_GPIO
-	int
-	default 1024 if X86_64
-	default 512
-
 config ARCH_SUSPEND_POSSIBLE
 	def_bool y
 
-- 
2.37.1

[PATCH v1 7/8] arm: Remove CONFIG_ARCH_NR_GPIO

[Christophe Leroy]

CONFIG_ARCH_NR_GPIO is not used anymore, remove it.

Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
---
 arch/arm/Kconfig | 21 ---------------------
 1 file changed, 21 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/Kconfig b/arch/arm/Kconfig
index 87badeae3181..5bfdb78a2d82 100644
--- a/arch/arm/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/arm/Kconfig
@@ -1227,27 +1227,6 @@ config ARM_PSCI
 	  0022A ("Power State Coordination Interface System Software on
 	  ARM processors").
 
-# The GPIO number here must be sorted by descending number. In case of
-# a multiplatform kernel, we just want the highest value required by the
-# selected platforms.
-config ARCH_NR_GPIO
-	int
-	default 2048 if ARCH_INTEL_SOCFPGA
-	default 1024 if ARCH_BRCMSTB || ARCH_RENESAS || ARCH_TEGRA || \
-		ARCH_ZYNQ || ARCH_ASPEED
-	default 512 if ARCH_EXYNOS || ARCH_KEYSTONE || SOC_OMAP5 || \
-		SOC_DRA7XX || ARCH_S3C24XX || ARCH_S3C64XX || ARCH_S5PV210
-	default 416 if ARCH_SUNXI
-	default 392 if ARCH_U8500
-	default 352 if ARCH_VT8500
-	default 288 if ARCH_ROCKCHIP
-	default 264 if MACH_H4700
-	default 0
-	help
-	  Maximum number of GPIOs in the system.
-
-	  If unsure, leave the default value.
-
 config HZ_FIXED
 	int
 	default 128 if SOC_AT91RM9200
-- 
2.37.1

[PATCH v1 8/8] arm64: Remove CONFIG_ARCH_NR_GPIO

[Christophe Leroy]

CONFIG_ARCH_NR_GPIO is not used anymore, remove it.

Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
---
 arch/arm64/Kconfig | 12 ------------
 1 file changed, 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
index 571cc234d0b3..be64ae29cd02 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
@@ -2093,18 +2093,6 @@ config STACKPROTECTOR_PER_TASK
 	def_bool y
 	depends on STACKPROTECTOR && CC_HAVE_STACKPROTECTOR_SYSREG
 
-# The GPIO number here must be sorted by descending number. In case of
-# a multiplatform kernel, we just want the highest value required by the
-# selected platforms.
-config ARCH_NR_GPIO
-        int
-        default 2048 if ARCH_APPLE
-        default 0
-        help
-          Maximum number of GPIOs in the system.
-
-          If unsure, leave the default value.
-
 endmenu # "Kernel Features"
 
 menu "Boot options"
-- 
2.37.1

Re: [PATCH v1 0/8] gpio: Get rid of ARCH_NR_GPIOS (v1)

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 7:17 PM Christophe Leroy
<christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu> wrote:
>
> Since commit 14e85c0e69d5 ("gpio: remove gpio_descs global array")
> there is no limitation on the number of GPIOs that can be allocated
> in the system since the allocation is fully dynamic.
>
> ARCH_NR_GPIOS is today only used in order to provide downwards
> gpiobase allocation from that value, while static allocation is
> performed upwards from 0. However that has the disadvantage of
> limiting the number of GPIOs that can be registered in the system.
>
> To overcome this limitation without requiring each and every
> platform to provide its 'best-guess' maximum number, rework the
> allocation to allocate from 256 upwards, allowing approx 2 millions
> of GPIOs.
>
> In the meantime, add a warning for drivers how are still doing
> static allocation, so that in the future the static allocation gets
> removed completely and dynamic allocation can start at base 0.

For non-commented (by me or others) patches
Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko!gmail.com>
For the patch 1 if you are going to address as suggested by the author
of the driver, you may also add my tag.

> Christophe Leroy (8):
>   gpio: aggregator: Stop using ARCH_NR_GPIOS
>   gpio: davinci: Stop using ARCH_NR_GPIOS
>   gpiolib: Warn on drivers still using static gpiobase allocation
>   gpiolib: Get rid of ARCH_NR_GPIOS
>   Documentation: gpio: Remove text about ARCH_NR_GPIOS
>   x86: Remove CONFIG_ARCH_NR_GPIO
>   arm: Remove CONFIG_ARCH_NR_GPIO
>   arm64: Remove CONFIG_ARCH_NR_GPIO
>
>  Documentation/driver-api/gpio/legacy.rst |  5 ---
>  arch/arm/Kconfig                         | 21 ---------
>  arch/arm/include/asm/gpio.h              |  1 -
>  arch/arm64/Kconfig                       | 12 ------
>  arch/x86/Kconfig                         |  5 ---
>  drivers/gpio/gpio-aggregator.c           |  8 ++--
>  drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c              |  3 --
>  drivers/gpio/gpio-sta2x11.c              |  5 +--
>  drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c                   | 13 +++---
>  include/asm-generic/gpio.h               | 55 +++++++++---------------
>  10 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 92 deletions(-)
>
> --
> 2.37.1
>


-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

Re: [PATCH v1 0/8] gpio: Get rid of ARCH_NR_GPIOS (v1)

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 11:20 PM Andy Shevchenko
<andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 7:17 PM Christophe Leroy
> <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu> wrote:
> >
> > Since commit 14e85c0e69d5 ("gpio: remove gpio_descs global array")
> > there is no limitation on the number of GPIOs that can be allocated
> > in the system since the allocation is fully dynamic.
> >
> > ARCH_NR_GPIOS is today only used in order to provide downwards
> > gpiobase allocation from that value, while static allocation is
> > performed upwards from 0. However that has the disadvantage of
> > limiting the number of GPIOs that can be registered in the system.
> >
> > To overcome this limitation without requiring each and every
> > platform to provide its 'best-guess' maximum number, rework the
> > allocation to allocate from 256 upwards, allowing approx 2 millions
> > of GPIOs.
> >
> > In the meantime, add a warning for drivers how are still doing
> > static allocation, so that in the future the static allocation gets
> > removed completely and dynamic allocation can start at base 0.
>
> For non-commented (by me or others) patches
> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko!gmail.com>

Should be
Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>

> For the patch 1 if you are going to address as suggested by the author
> of the driver, you may also add my tag.



-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko