From: Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir_zapolskiy@mentor.com>
To: Stefan Agner <stefan@agner.ch>
Cc: <linus.walleij@linaro.org>, <shawnguo@kernel.org>,
<aalonso@freescale.com>, <b38343@freescale.com>,
<ldewangan@nvidia.com>, <van.freenix@gmail.com>,
<p.zabel@pengutronix.de>, <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: freescale: avoid overwriting pin config when freeing GPIO
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 21:17:13 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e72b95e2-353a-d058-4321-dfbdaac2ba1b@mentor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <960b299c947424598ec26bfcb36fd96b@agner.ch>
Hi Stefan,
On 09/27/2016 07:37 PM, Stefan Agner wrote:
> On 2016-09-27 05:12, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
>> Hi Stefan,
>>
>> On 09/27/2016 03:26 AM, Stefan Agner wrote:
>>> If a GPIO gets freed after selecting a new pinctrl configuration
>>> the driver should not change pinctrl anymore. Otherwise this will
>>> likely lead to a unusable pin configuration for > the newly selected
>>> pinctrl.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Stefan Agner <stefan@agner.ch>
>>> ---
>>> This turned out to be problematic when using the I2C GPIO bus recovery
>>> functionality. After muxing back to I2C, the GPIO is being freed, which
>>> cased I2C to stop working completely.
>>
>> IMHO this recent "i.MX I2C GPIO bus recovery" feature is kind of a hack,
>> for example I believe it breaks I2C bus driver initialization on i.MX31
>> boards, where today there is no pinctrl driver at all.
>
> This has been addressed by Li Yang's patch, already in the next branch:
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/9/12/1161
Nice to know about it, thank you for the link.
>>
>> IMHO something like I've partially described in the recent "Requesting as
>> a GPIO a pin already used through pinctrl" topic should be done here.
>> Could you consider to add another pinctrl-1 group with alternative GPIO
>> line mux/config settings to an i2c controller device node and apply it,
>> when you need a bus recovery? You may find references how this kind of
>> dynamic pinctrl management is done within mmc/sd subsystem.
>
> I don't quite understand, that is already the case. This is what device
> tree looks like to get the I2C recovery functionality:
>
> &i2c1 {
> pinctrl-names = "default", "gpio";
> pinctrl-0 = <&pinctrl_i2c1>;
> pinctrl-1 = <&pinctrl_i2c1_gpio>;
> scl-gpios = <&gpio1 6 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
> sda-gpios = <&gpio1 7 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
> status = "okay";
> };
Great, then why do you experience a problem you've described?
>>> After muxing back to I2C, the GPIO is being freed, which cased I2C
>>> to stop working completely.
Release GPIO firstly, then mux back to I2C, that's the correct sequence
and I believe it obsoletes this change.
>>
>> By the way did I miss a patch, which falls back to mux settings on
>> .gpio_disable_free call for non-Vybrid platforms?
>
> Currently only Vybrid makes use of the .gpio_request_enable... and so
> should .gpio_disable_free then.
>
So, I guess this is a change with a runtime difference for Vybrid only.
I find that it was initially done wrong that a number of Vybrid specific
hooks were added to the shared pinctrl-imx.c, in my opinion it is better
to make needed abstractions and move all code around SHARE_MUX_CONF_REG
to pinctrl-vf610.c:
./pinctrl-imx.c:216: if (info->flags & SHARE_MUX_CONF_REG) {
./pinctrl-imx.c:317: if (!(info->flags & SHARE_MUX_CONF_REG))
./pinctrl-imx.c:357: if (!(info->flags & SHARE_MUX_CONF_REG))
./pinctrl-imx.c:382: if (!(info->flags & SHARE_MUX_CONF_REG))
./pinctrl-imx.c:425: if (info->flags & SHARE_MUX_CONF_REG)
./pinctrl-imx.c:450: if (info->flags & SHARE_MUX_CONF_REG) {
./pinctrl-imx.c:534: if (info->flags & SHARE_MUX_CONF_REG)
./pinctrl-imx.c:575: if (info->flags & SHARE_MUX_CONF_REG) {
Nevertheless this is not directly related to the change.
--
With best wishes,
Vladimir
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-27 18:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-27 0:26 [PATCH] pinctrl: freescale: avoid overwriting pin config when freeing GPIO Stefan Agner
2016-09-27 12:12 ` Vladimir Zapolskiy
2016-09-27 16:37 ` Stefan Agner
2016-09-27 18:17 ` Vladimir Zapolskiy [this message]
2016-09-27 19:34 ` Stefan Agner
2016-09-27 20:28 ` Vladimir Zapolskiy
2016-09-28 2:00 ` Viresh Kumar
2016-09-28 3:38 ` Stefan Agner
2016-09-28 4:14 ` Viresh Kumar
2016-09-29 16:33 ` Stefan Agner
2016-09-30 2:12 ` Viresh Kumar
2016-10-10 8:32 ` Linus Walleij
2016-09-28 12:07 ` Vladimir Zapolskiy
2016-09-29 6:46 ` Viresh Kumar
2016-09-29 12:16 ` Vladimir Zapolskiy
2016-09-30 2:22 ` Viresh Kumar
2016-10-10 8:33 ` Linus Walleij
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=e72b95e2-353a-d058-4321-dfbdaac2ba1b@mentor.com \
--to=vladimir_zapolskiy@mentor.com \
--cc=aalonso@freescale.com \
--cc=b38343@freescale.com \
--cc=ldewangan@nvidia.com \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=p.zabel@pengutronix.de \
--cc=shawnguo@kernel.org \
--cc=stefan@agner.ch \
--cc=van.freenix@gmail.com \
/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