Re: [PATCH 1/2] i2c-mux-gpio: test if the gpio can sleep

[Ionut Nicu <ioan.nicu.ext@nsn.com>]

On 10.10.2013 10:46, ext Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> On 10/10/2013 10:39 AM, Ionut Nicu wrote:
>> Some gpio chips may have get/set operations that
>> can sleep. For this type of chips we must use the
>> _cansleep() version of gpio_set_value.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ionut Nicu <ioan.nicu.ext@nsn.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/i2c/muxes/i2c-mux-gpio.c |   11 ++++++++---
>>  1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/muxes/i2c-mux-gpio.c b/drivers/i2c/muxes/i2c-mux-gpio.c
>> index a764da7..b5f17ef 100644
>> --- a/drivers/i2c/muxes/i2c-mux-gpio.c
>> +++ b/drivers/i2c/muxes/i2c-mux-gpio.c
>> @@ -27,11 +27,16 @@ struct gpiomux {
>>  
>>  static void i2c_mux_gpio_set(const struct gpiomux *mux, unsigned val)
>>  {
>> +	unsigned gpio;
>>  	int i;
>>  
>> -	for (i = 0; i < mux->data.n_gpios; i++)
>> -		gpio_set_value(mux->gpio_base + mux->data.gpios[i],
>> -			       val & (1 << i));
>> +	for (i = 0; i < mux->data.n_gpios; i++) {
>> +		gpio = mux->gpio_base + mux->data.gpios[i];
>> +		if (gpio_cansleep(gpio))
>> +			gpio_set_value_cansleep(gpio, val & (1 << i));
>> +		else
>> +			gpio_set_value(gpio, val & (1 << i));
> 
> The proper way to do this is just always use the _cansleep() version.
> gpio_set_value() only works for chips which do not sleep,
> gpio_set_value_cansleep() works for both those who do sleep and those who do
> not.
> 

Ok, then I will re-work the patch to do just that. Thanks!