Re: [PATCH] eint: add gpio vritual number select

Chuanjia Liu
2018-12-17T03:15:04Z

On Thu, 2018-12-13 at 11:33 -0800, Sean Wang wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 1:36 AM <chuanjia.liu@mediatek.com> wrote:
> >
> > From: Chuanjia Liu <Chuanjia.Liu@mediatek.com>
> >
> > This patch add gpio vritual number select,avoid virtual gpio set SMT.
>
> s/gpio/GPIO/
> s/vritual/virtual/
>
> Virtual GPIOs you said here that means these pins only used inside SoC
> and not being exported to outside SoC, right? It seems this kind of
> pins doesn't need SMT.
>
Yes,virtual gpio only used inside SOC and these pins doesn't need set
SMT
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Chuanjia Liu <Chuanjia.Liu@mediatek.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/pinctrl/mediatek/mtk-eint.h | 1 +
> > drivers/pinctrl/mediatek/pinctrl-mt8183.c | 1 +
> > drivers/pinctrl/mediatek/pinctrl-mtk-common-v2.c | 9 ++++++---
> > 3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/mediatek/mtk-eint.h b/drivers/pinctrl/mediatek/mtk-eint.h
> > index 48468d0..c16beaf 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pinctrl/mediatek/mtk-eint.h
> > +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/mediatek/mtk-eint.h
> > @@ -37,6 +37,7 @@ struct mtk_eint_hw {
> > u8 ports;
> > unsigned int ap_num;
> > unsigned int db_cnt;
> > + unsigned int vir_start;
> > };
> >
> > struct mtk_eint;
> > diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/mediatek/pinctrl-mt8183.c b/drivers/pinctrl/mediatek/pinctrl-mt8183.c
> > index 6262fd3..bbeafd3 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pinctrl/mediatek/pinctrl-mt8183.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/mediatek/pinctrl-mt8183.c
> > @@ -497,6 +497,7 @@
> > .ports = 6,
> > .ap_num = 212,
> > .db_cnt = 13,
> > + .vir_start = 180,
> > };
> >
> > static const struct mtk_pin_soc mt8183_data = {
> > diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/mediatek/pinctrl-mtk-common-v2.c b/drivers/pinctrl/mediatek/pinctrl-mtk-common-v2.c
> > index 4a9e0d4..ca3bae1 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pinctrl/mediatek/pinctrl-mtk-common-v2.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/mediatek/pinctrl-mtk-common-v2.c
> > @@ -289,9 +289,12 @@ static int mtk_xt_set_gpio_as_eint(void *data, unsigned long eint_n)
> > if (err)
> > return err;
> >
> > - err = mtk_hw_set_value(hw, desc, PINCTRL_PIN_REG_SMT, MTK_ENABLE);
> > - if (err)
> > - return err;
> > + if (gpio_n < hw->eint->hw->vir_start) {
> > + err = mtk_hw_set_value(hw, desc, PINCTRL_PIN_REG_SMT,
> > + MTK_ENABLE);
> > + if (err)
> > + return err;
> > + }
>
> The changes will break these SoCs without a properly configured vir_start.
>
> If SMT seems unnecessary for these kinds of virtual GPIOs pin in the
> path, we can do it as
>
> err = mtk_hw_set_value(hw, desc, PINCTRL_PIN_REG_SMT,
> MTK_ENABLE);
> /* please add comments for the exclusion condition */
> if (err && err != -ENOTSUPP)
> return err;
>
> If there is getting much special on certain pins between SoCs, and
> then we can consider creating a desc->flag to split logic.

Yes,SMT unnecessary for these kinds of virtual GPIOS pin in the path,if
do it as
err = mtk_hw_set_value(hw, desc, PINCTRL_PIN_REG_SMT,
MTK_ENABLE);
if (err && err != -ENOTSUPP)
return err;
I wonder if system will lose -ENOTSUPP information when smt was not
successfully set by real gpio?
>
> >
> > return 0;
> > }
> > --
> > 1.7.9.5