[PATCH 1/2] gpiolib: introduce gpio_set_pullup

[PATCH 1/2] gpiolib: introduce gpio_set_pullup

[Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD]

Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>
Cc: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com>
Cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
---
 drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c     |   44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 include/asm-generic/gpio.h |    4 ++++
 include/linux/gpio.h       |    5 +++++
 3 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
index a971e3d..b7e5e75 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
@@ -1519,6 +1519,50 @@ fail:
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpio_set_debounce);
 
+/**
+ * gpio_set_pullup - sets @pullup for a @gpio
+ * @gpio: the gpio to set pullup
+ * @pullup: pullup level
+ */
+int gpio_set_pullup(unsigned gpio, unsigned pullup)
+{
+	unsigned long		flags;
+	struct gpio_chip	*chip;
+	struct gpio_desc	*desc = &gpio_desc[gpio];
+	int			status = -EINVAL;
+
+	spin_lock_irqsave(&gpio_lock, flags);
+
+	if (!gpio_is_valid(gpio))
+		goto fail;
+	chip = desc->chip;
+	if (!chip || !chip->set_pullup)
+		goto fail;
+	gpio -= chip->base;
+	if (gpio >= chip->ngpio)
+		goto fail;
+	status = gpio_ensure_requested(desc, gpio);
+	if (status < 0)
+		goto fail;
+
+	/* now we know the gpio is valid and chip won't vanish */
+
+	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&gpio_lock, flags);
+
+	might_sleep_if(chip->can_sleep);
+
+	return chip->set_pullup(chip, gpio, pullup);
+
+fail:
+	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&gpio_lock, flags);
+	if (status)
+		pr_debug("%s: gpio-%d status %d\n",
+			__func__, gpio, status);
+
+	return status;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpio_set_pullup);
+
 /* I/O calls are only valid after configuration completed; the relevant
  * "is this a valid GPIO" error checks should already have been done.
  *
diff --git a/include/asm-generic/gpio.h b/include/asm-generic/gpio.h
index 8c86210..085ef16 100644
--- a/include/asm-generic/gpio.h
+++ b/include/asm-generic/gpio.h
@@ -107,6 +107,9 @@ struct gpio_chip {
 	int			(*set_debounce)(struct gpio_chip *chip,
 						unsigned offset, unsigned debounce);
 
+	int			(*set_pullup)(struct gpio_chip *chip,
+						unsigned offset, unsigned pullup);
+
 	void			(*set)(struct gpio_chip *chip,
 						unsigned offset, int value);
 
@@ -155,6 +158,7 @@ extern int gpio_direction_input(unsigned gpio);
 extern int gpio_direction_output(unsigned gpio, int value);
 
 extern int gpio_set_debounce(unsigned gpio, unsigned debounce);
+extern int gpio_set_pullup(unsigned gpio, unsigned pullup);
 
 extern int gpio_get_value_cansleep(unsigned gpio);
 extern void gpio_set_value_cansleep(unsigned gpio, int value);
diff --git a/include/linux/gpio.h b/include/linux/gpio.h
index 38ac48b..5c786e7 100644
--- a/include/linux/gpio.h
+++ b/include/linux/gpio.h
@@ -90,6 +90,11 @@ static inline int gpio_set_debounce(unsigned gpio, unsigned debounce)
 	return -ENOSYS;
 }
 
+static inline int gpio_set_pullup(unsigned gpio, unsigned pullup)
+{
+	return -ENOSYS;
+}
+
 static inline int gpio_get_value(unsigned gpio)
 {
 	/* GPIO can never have been requested or set as {in,out}put */
-- 
1.7.7

[PATCH 2/2] gpiolib: introduce gpio_set_deglitch

[Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD]

this will allow to manage the Glitch Input Filter
as present on AT91 as example

Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>
Cc: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com>
Cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
---
 drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c     |   44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 include/asm-generic/gpio.h |    4 ++++
 include/linux/gpio.h       |    5 +++++
 3 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
index b7e5e75..d2b1833 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
@@ -1563,6 +1563,50 @@ fail:
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpio_set_pullup);
 
+/**
+ * gpio_set_deglitch - sets @deglitch for a @gpio
+ * @gpio: the gpio to set deglitch
+ * @deglitch: deglitch level
+ */
+int gpio_set_deglitch(unsigned gpio, unsigned deglitch)
+{
+	unsigned long		flags;
+	struct gpio_chip	*chip;
+	struct gpio_desc	*desc = &gpio_desc[gpio];
+	int			status = -EINVAL;
+
+	spin_lock_irqsave(&gpio_lock, flags);
+
+	if (!gpio_is_valid(gpio))
+		goto fail;
+	chip = desc->chip;
+	if (!chip || !chip->set_deglitch)
+		goto fail;
+	gpio -= chip->base;
+	if (gpio >= chip->ngpio)
+		goto fail;
+	status = gpio_ensure_requested(desc, gpio);
+	if (status < 0)
+		goto fail;
+
+	/* now we know the gpio is valid and chip won't vanish */
+
+	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&gpio_lock, flags);
+
+	might_sleep_if(chip->can_sleep);
+
+	return chip->set_deglitch(chip, gpio, deglitch);
+
+fail:
+	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&gpio_lock, flags);
+	if (status)
+		pr_debug("%s: gpio-%d status %d\n",
+			__func__, gpio, status);
+
+	return status;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpio_set_deglitch);
+
 /* I/O calls are only valid after configuration completed; the relevant
  * "is this a valid GPIO" error checks should already have been done.
  *
diff --git a/include/asm-generic/gpio.h b/include/asm-generic/gpio.h
index 085ef16..20a9786 100644
--- a/include/asm-generic/gpio.h
+++ b/include/asm-generic/gpio.h
@@ -110,6 +110,9 @@ struct gpio_chip {
 	int			(*set_pullup)(struct gpio_chip *chip,
 						unsigned offset, unsigned pullup);
 
+	int			(*set_deglitch)(struct gpio_chip *chip,
+						unsigned offset, unsigned deglitch);
+
 	void			(*set)(struct gpio_chip *chip,
 						unsigned offset, int value);
 
@@ -159,6 +162,7 @@ extern int gpio_direction_output(unsigned gpio, int value);
 
 extern int gpio_set_debounce(unsigned gpio, unsigned debounce);
 extern int gpio_set_pullup(unsigned gpio, unsigned pullup);
+extern int gpio_set_deglitch(unsigned gpio, unsigned deglitch);
 
 extern int gpio_get_value_cansleep(unsigned gpio);
 extern void gpio_set_value_cansleep(unsigned gpio, int value);
diff --git a/include/linux/gpio.h b/include/linux/gpio.h
index 5c786e7..bfbc3d7 100644
--- a/include/linux/gpio.h
+++ b/include/linux/gpio.h
@@ -95,6 +95,11 @@ static inline int gpio_set_pullup(unsigned gpio, unsigned pullup)
 	return -ENOSYS;
 }
 
+static inline int gpio_set_deglitch(unsigned gpio, unsigned deglitch)
+{
+	return -ENOSYS;
+}
+
 static inline int gpio_get_value(unsigned gpio)
 {
 	/* GPIO can never have been requested or set as {in,out}put */
-- 
1.7.7

Re: [PATCH 2/2] gpiolib: introduce gpio_set_deglitch

[Felipe Balbi]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1100 bytes --]

Hi,

On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 03:08:40PM +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> this will allow to manage the Glitch Input Filter
> as present on AT91 as example
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>
> Cc: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com>
> Cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
> ---
>  drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c     |   44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  include/asm-generic/gpio.h |    4 ++++
>  include/linux/gpio.h       |    5 +++++
>  3 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
> index b7e5e75..d2b1833 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
> @@ -1563,6 +1563,50 @@ fail:
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpio_set_pullup);
>  
> +/**
> + * gpio_set_deglitch - sets @deglitch for a @gpio
> + * @gpio: the gpio to set deglitch
> + * @deglitch: deglitch level
> + */
> +int gpio_set_deglitch(unsigned gpio, unsigned deglitch)

sounds a lot like debounce, what's the difference ?

-- 
balbi

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH 2/2] gpiolib: introduce gpio_set_deglitch

[Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD]

On 16:14 Fri 25 Nov     , Felipe Balbi wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 03:08:40PM +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> > this will allow to manage the Glitch Input Filter
> > as present on AT91 as example
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>
> > Cc: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com>
> > Cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c     |   44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  include/asm-generic/gpio.h |    4 ++++
> >  include/linux/gpio.h       |    5 +++++
> >  3 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
> > index b7e5e75..d2b1833 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
> > @@ -1563,6 +1563,50 @@ fail:
> >  }
> >  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpio_set_pullup);
> >  
> > +/**
> > + * gpio_set_deglitch - sets @deglitch for a @gpio
> > + * @gpio: the gpio to set deglitch
> > + * @deglitch: deglitch level
> > + */
> > +int gpio_set_deglitch(unsigned gpio, unsigned deglitch)
> 
> sounds a lot like debounce, what's the difference ?
deglitch allow you to filter the fact that the line take time to be stable
go to 1 and 0

debounce will set 2 different threshold for changing the state from 0 to 1 and
invertly

Best Regards,
J.

Re: [PATCH 1/2] gpiolib: introduce gpio_set_pullup

[Felipe Balbi]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2147 bytes --]

Hi,

On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 03:08:39PM +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>
> Cc: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com>
> Cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
> ---
>  drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c     |   44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  include/asm-generic/gpio.h |    4 ++++
>  include/linux/gpio.h       |    5 +++++
>  3 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
> index a971e3d..b7e5e75 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
> @@ -1519,6 +1519,50 @@ fail:
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpio_set_debounce);
>  
> +/**
> + * gpio_set_pullup - sets @pullup for a @gpio
> + * @gpio: the gpio to set pullup
> + * @pullup: pullup level
> + */
> +int gpio_set_pullup(unsigned gpio, unsigned pullup)
> +{
> +	unsigned long		flags;
> +	struct gpio_chip	*chip;
> +	struct gpio_desc	*desc = &gpio_desc[gpio];
> +	int			status = -EINVAL;
> +
> +	spin_lock_irqsave(&gpio_lock, flags);
> +
> +	if (!gpio_is_valid(gpio))
> +		goto fail;
> +	chip = desc->chip;
> +	if (!chip || !chip->set_pullup)
> +		goto fail;
> +	gpio -= chip->base;
> +	if (gpio >= chip->ngpio)
> +		goto fail;
> +	status = gpio_ensure_requested(desc, gpio);
> +	if (status < 0)
> +		goto fail;
> +
> +	/* now we know the gpio is valid and chip won't vanish */
> +
> +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&gpio_lock, flags);
> +
> +	might_sleep_if(chip->can_sleep);
> +
> +	return chip->set_pullup(chip, gpio, pullup);
> +
> +fail:
> +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&gpio_lock, flags);
> +	if (status)
> +		pr_debug("%s: gpio-%d status %d\n",
> +			__func__, gpio, status);
> +
> +	return status;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpio_set_pullup);

Maybe I'm missing something, but isn't it essentially what
gpio_set_value() does ? I mean, you set a pullup and you get '1' value
and set a pulldown and you get a '0' value ??

Without a proper description of the necessity for this change, I can't
easily tell them apart :-(

-- 
balbi

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH 1/2] gpiolib: introduce gpio_set_pullup

[Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD]

On 16:16 Fri 25 Nov     , Felipe Balbi wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 03:08:39PM +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>
> > Cc: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com>
> > Cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c     |   44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  include/asm-generic/gpio.h |    4 ++++
> >  include/linux/gpio.h       |    5 +++++
> >  3 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
> > index a971e3d..b7e5e75 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
> > @@ -1519,6 +1519,50 @@ fail:
> >  }
> >  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpio_set_debounce);
> >  
> > +/**
> > + * gpio_set_pullup - sets @pullup for a @gpio
> > + * @gpio: the gpio to set pullup
> > + * @pullup: pullup level
> > + */
> > +int gpio_set_pullup(unsigned gpio, unsigned pullup)
> > +{
> > +	unsigned long		flags;
> > +	struct gpio_chip	*chip;
> > +	struct gpio_desc	*desc = &gpio_desc[gpio];
> > +	int			status = -EINVAL;
> > +
> > +	spin_lock_irqsave(&gpio_lock, flags);
> > +
> > +	if (!gpio_is_valid(gpio))
> > +		goto fail;
> > +	chip = desc->chip;
> > +	if (!chip || !chip->set_pullup)
> > +		goto fail;
> > +	gpio -= chip->base;
> > +	if (gpio >= chip->ngpio)
> > +		goto fail;
> > +	status = gpio_ensure_requested(desc, gpio);
> > +	if (status < 0)
> > +		goto fail;
> > +
> > +	/* now we know the gpio is valid and chip won't vanish */
> > +
> > +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&gpio_lock, flags);
> > +
> > +	might_sleep_if(chip->can_sleep);
> > +
> > +	return chip->set_pullup(chip, gpio, pullup);
> > +
> > +fail:
> > +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&gpio_lock, flags);
> > +	if (status)
> > +		pr_debug("%s: gpio-%d status %d\n",
> > +			__func__, gpio, status);
> > +
> > +	return status;
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpio_set_pullup);
> 
> Maybe I'm missing something, but isn't it essentially what
> gpio_set_value() does ? I mean, you set a pullup and you get '1' value
> and set a pulldown and you get a '0' value ??
> 
> Without a proper description of the necessity for this change, I can't
> easily tell them apart :-(
set_value is for output set_pullup is for input mode

some IP allow you when you configure an gpio as input to enable the internal pullup
so no need on the board to add an external pull up

Best Regards,
J.

> 
> -- 
> balbi

Re: [PATCH 1/2] gpiolib: introduce gpio_set_pullup

[Felipe Balbi]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2813 bytes --]

On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 03:23:05PM +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> On 16:16 Fri 25 Nov     , Felipe Balbi wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 03:08:39PM +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> > > Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>
> > > Cc: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com>
> > > Cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c     |   44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  include/asm-generic/gpio.h |    4 ++++
> > >  include/linux/gpio.h       |    5 +++++
> > >  3 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
> > > index a971e3d..b7e5e75 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
> > > @@ -1519,6 +1519,50 @@ fail:
> > >  }
> > >  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpio_set_debounce);
> > >  
> > > +/**
> > > + * gpio_set_pullup - sets @pullup for a @gpio
> > > + * @gpio: the gpio to set pullup
> > > + * @pullup: pullup level
> > > + */
> > > +int gpio_set_pullup(unsigned gpio, unsigned pullup)
> > > +{
> > > +	unsigned long		flags;
> > > +	struct gpio_chip	*chip;
> > > +	struct gpio_desc	*desc = &gpio_desc[gpio];
> > > +	int			status = -EINVAL;
> > > +
> > > +	spin_lock_irqsave(&gpio_lock, flags);
> > > +
> > > +	if (!gpio_is_valid(gpio))
> > > +		goto fail;
> > > +	chip = desc->chip;
> > > +	if (!chip || !chip->set_pullup)
> > > +		goto fail;
> > > +	gpio -= chip->base;
> > > +	if (gpio >= chip->ngpio)
> > > +		goto fail;
> > > +	status = gpio_ensure_requested(desc, gpio);
> > > +	if (status < 0)
> > > +		goto fail;
> > > +
> > > +	/* now we know the gpio is valid and chip won't vanish */
> > > +
> > > +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&gpio_lock, flags);
> > > +
> > > +	might_sleep_if(chip->can_sleep);
> > > +
> > > +	return chip->set_pullup(chip, gpio, pullup);
> > > +
> > > +fail:
> > > +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&gpio_lock, flags);
> > > +	if (status)
> > > +		pr_debug("%s: gpio-%d status %d\n",
> > > +			__func__, gpio, status);
> > > +
> > > +	return status;
> > > +}
> > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpio_set_pullup);
> > 
> > Maybe I'm missing something, but isn't it essentially what
> > gpio_set_value() does ? I mean, you set a pullup and you get '1' value
> > and set a pulldown and you get a '0' value ??
> > 
> > Without a proper description of the necessity for this change, I can't
> > easily tell them apart :-(
> set_value is for output set_pullup is for input mode
> 
> some IP allow you when you configure an gpio as input to enable the
> internal pullup so no need on the board to add an external pull up

I see, that would fit nicely on the changelog :-)

-- 
balbi

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH 1/2] gpiolib: introduce gpio_set_pullup

[Mark Brown]

On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 03:08:39PM +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:

> +/**
> + * gpio_set_pullup - sets @pullup for a @gpio
> + * @gpio: the gpio to set pullup
> + * @pullup: pullup level
> + */
> +int gpio_set_pullup(unsigned gpio, unsigned pullup)

This has some overlap with the pinmux subsystem.  We also need
documentation of what the pullup values mean.

Re: [PATCH 1/2] gpiolib: introduce gpio_set_pullup

[Igor Grinberg]

On 11/25/11 17:34, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 03:08:39PM +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> 
>> +/**
>> + * gpio_set_pullup - sets @pullup for a @gpio
>> + * @gpio: the gpio to set pullup
>> + * @pullup: pullup level
>> + */
>> +int gpio_set_pullup(unsigned gpio, unsigned pullup)
> 
> This has some overlap with the pinmux subsystem.  We also need
> documentation of what the pullup values mean.

+1

AFAIK, 3 values are there: up, down and highz
Also, IMO, this should have no effect if the GPIO is configured for output.


-- 
Regards,
Igor.

Re: [PATCH 1/2] gpiolib: introduce gpio_set_pullup

[Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD]

On 11:35 Sun 27 Nov     , Igor Grinberg wrote:
> On 11/25/11 17:34, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 03:08:39PM +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> > 
> >> +/**
> >> + * gpio_set_pullup - sets @pullup for a @gpio
> >> + * @gpio: the gpio to set pullup
> >> + * @pullup: pullup level
> >> + */
> >> +int gpio_set_pullup(unsigned gpio, unsigned pullup)
> > 
> > This has some overlap with the pinmux subsystem.  We also need
> > documentation of what the pullup values mean.
yes and no

as some gpio IP (only gpio i2c extender as example ) have it too
so you can not use the pinmux for this
> 
> +1
> 
> AFAIK, 3 values are there: up, down and highz
> Also, IMO, this should have no effect if the GPIO is configured for output.
I see some pio IP have 2 highz

but yes 3 value normaly

Best Regards,
J.

RE: [PATCH 1/2] gpiolib: introduce gpio_set_pullup

[Stephen Warren]

Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote at Monday, November 28, 2011 7:37 PM:
> On 11:35 Sun 27 Nov     , Igor Grinberg wrote:
> > On 11/25/11 17:34, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 03:08:39PM +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> > >
> > >> +/**
> > >> + * gpio_set_pullup - sets @pullup for a @gpio
> > >> + * @gpio: the gpio to set pullup
> > >> + * @pullup: pullup level
> > >> + */
> > >> +int gpio_set_pullup(unsigned gpio, unsigned pullup)
> > >
> > > This has some overlap with the pinmux subsystem.  We also need
> > > documentation of what the pullup values mean.
> yes and no
> 
> as some gpio IP (only gpio i2c extender as example ) have it too
> so you can not use the pinmux for this

Why not?

I believe the pinctrl subsystem should be applicable to any chip, be it
the main SoC/CPU in the system, or any other chip. We don't currently
have any non-SoC drivers, but that's just because nobody has written them
yet; there's no technical reason they couldn't exist.

-- 
nvpublic

Re: [PATCH 1/2] gpiolib: introduce gpio_set_pullup

[Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD]

On 08:51 Tue 29 Nov     , Stephen Warren wrote:
> Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote at Monday, November 28, 2011 7:37 PM:
> > On 11:35 Sun 27 Nov     , Igor Grinberg wrote:
> > > On 11/25/11 17:34, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 03:08:39PM +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> +/**
> > > >> + * gpio_set_pullup - sets @pullup for a @gpio
> > > >> + * @gpio: the gpio to set pullup
> > > >> + * @pullup: pullup level
> > > >> + */
> > > >> +int gpio_set_pullup(unsigned gpio, unsigned pullup)
> > > >
> > > > This has some overlap with the pinmux subsystem.  We also need
> > > > documentation of what the pullup values mean.
> > yes and no
> > 
> > as some gpio IP (only gpio i2c extender as example ) have it too
> > so you can not use the pinmux for this
> 
> Why not?
> 
> I believe the pinctrl subsystem should be applicable to any chip, be it
> the main SoC/CPU in the system, or any other chip. We don't currently
> have any non-SoC drivers, but that's just because nobody has written them
> yet; there's no technical reason they couldn't exist.
> 
sorry pinmux for gpio specific management i's overkill

Best Regards,
J.

Re: [PATCH 1/2] gpiolib: introduce gpio_set_pullup

[Mark Brown]

On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 04:40:11PM +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> On 08:51 Tue 29 Nov     , Stephen Warren wrote:

> > I believe the pinctrl subsystem should be applicable to any chip, be it
> > the main SoC/CPU in the system, or any other chip. We don't currently
> > have any non-SoC drivers, but that's just because nobody has written them
> > yet; there's no technical reason they couldn't exist.

> sorry pinmux for gpio specific management i's overkill

If it's a GPIO-only device then probaby but lots of devices have a
fairly large range of signals that can be brought out on the pins (often
even more than a typical SoC actually).