From: Ryan Mallon <ryan@bluewatersys.com>
To: linux kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"David Brownell" <dbrownell@users.sourceforge.net>,
gregkh@suse.de,
"Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>,
ext-jani.1.nikula@nokia.com
Subject: gpiolib and sleeping gpios
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 09:47:59 +1200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C1A980F.8080908@bluewatersys.com> (raw)
Hi,
Currently implementors of gpiolib must provide implementations for
gpio_get_value, gpio_set_value and gpio_cansleep. Most of the
implementations just #define these to the double underscore prefixed
versions in drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c. A few implementations have a simple
wrapper function which provides a fast path for the SoC gpios, and calls
gpiolib for the any additional gpios, such as those added by an io expander.
Although gpio_chips know whether or not they may sleep, gpios which can
sleep need to call gpio_[set/get]_value_cansleep. The only difference
between __gpio_(set/get)_value and gpio_(set/get)_value_cansleep is that
the cansleep versions calls might_sleep_if. Most drivers call
gpio_(get/set)_value, rather than the cansleep variants. I haven't done
a full audit of all of the drivers (which is a reasonably involved
task), but I would hazard a guess that some of these could be replaced
by the cansleep versions.
Would it not be simpler to combine the calls and have something like this:
void __gpio_get_value(unsigned gpio, int value)
{
struct gpio_chip *chip;
chip = gpio_to_chip(gpio);
might_sleep_if(extra_checks && chip->can_sleep);
chip->set(chip, gpio - chip->base, value);
}
Then all drivers can just call gpio_(set/get)_value and any attempts to
use sleeping gpios from an non-sleeping context will be caught by the
might_sleep_if check. Is there something I am missing about this?
I can prepare a patch which combines the non-sleeping and sleeping
variants, but I wanted to check that I'm not missing something
fundamental first.
Thanks,
~Ryan
--
Bluewater Systems Ltd - ARM Technology Solution Centre
Ryan Mallon 5 Amuri Park, 404 Barbadoes St
ryan@bluewatersys.com PO Box 13 889, Christchurch 8013
http://www.bluewatersys.com New Zealand
Phone: +64 3 3779127 Freecall: Australia 1800 148 751
Fax: +64 3 3779135 USA 1800 261 2934
next reply other threads:[~2010-06-17 21:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-06-17 21:47 Ryan Mallon [this message]
2010-06-18 5:27 ` gpiolib and sleeping gpios Uwe Kleine-König
2010-06-18 6:16 ` David Brownell
2010-06-18 22:01 ` Ryan Mallon
2010-06-19 6:21 ` David Brownell
2010-06-20 21:31 ` Ryan Mallon
2010-06-21 2:40 ` David Brownell
2010-06-21 5:09 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2010-06-23 1:59 ` [RFC PATCH] Rework gpio cansleep (was Re: gpiolib and sleeping gpios) Ryan Mallon
2010-06-23 4:37 ` David Brownell
2010-06-23 4:58 ` Eric Miao
2010-06-23 9:51 ` David Brownell
2010-06-23 5:02 ` Ryan Mallon
2010-06-23 5:26 ` Eric Miao
2010-06-23 9:39 ` David Brownell
2010-06-23 19:12 ` Ryan Mallon
2010-06-24 4:46 ` [RFC PATCH] Rework gpio cansleep (was Re: gpiolib and sleepinggpios) Jon Povey
2010-06-24 8:20 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2010-06-24 8:29 ` Jani Nikula
2010-06-24 10:31 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2010-06-24 6:41 ` [RFC PATCH] Rework gpio cansleep (was Re: gpiolib and sleeping gpios) Uwe Kleine-König
2010-06-23 22:53 ` Jamie Lokier
2010-06-23 23:06 ` Ryan Mallon
2010-06-24 0:04 ` Jamie Lokier
2010-06-24 0:10 ` Ryan Mallon
2010-06-25 7:19 ` David Brownell
2010-06-24 4:33 ` [RFC PATCH] Rework gpio cansleep (was Re: gpiolib and sleepinggpios) Jon Povey
2010-06-29 8:29 ` gpiolib and sleeping gpios CoffBeta
2010-06-23 11:53 ` Jani Nikula
2010-06-23 12:40 ` David Brownell
2010-06-23 13:22 ` Jani Nikula
2010-06-23 13:39 ` David Brownell
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=4C1A980F.8080908@bluewatersys.com \
--to=ryan@bluewatersys.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dbrownell@users.sourceforge.net \
--cc=ext-jani.1.nikula@nokia.com \
--cc=gregkh@suse.de \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de \
/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