From: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
To: David Cohen <david.a.cohen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: baytrail: show output gpio state correctly on Intel Baytrail
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2014 21:34:24 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141104193424.GT1618@lahna.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141104191115.GC2224@psi-dev26.jf.intel.com>
On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 11:11:16AM -0800, David Cohen wrote:
> > It is not implicit at all.
> >
> > The user of the GPIO in ACPI DSDT table says something like:
> >
> > Name (_DEP, Package () { \_SB.GPO2 })
> >
> > or similar. That is *explicit* dependency. Here \_SB.GPO2 is one of the
> > GPIO banks.
>
> Either kernel knows on-the-fly or statically the required dependency.
> The static dependency is well described by Kconfig. An on-the-fly
> dependency could be a probe execution failing because it couldn't access
> part of required resources. If the dependency is temporarily not
> described this way, it would still be acceptable a documentation
> somewhere explaining that we do have this hidden thing going on.
The only thing kernel knows about this is when it finds that the
device in question has _DEP object. Once that happens and it evaluates
to a list of devices we depend on, we can defer this particular driver
going further in probe until all the dependencies listed in _DEP are
resolved.
The documentation you are after is ACPI 5.1 specification downloadable
freely at uefi.org/acpi.
> > > But IMHO all dependency to a driver should be explicitly described
> > > (e.g. on Kconfigs, or maybe failing probe). With current situation if we
> > > do not select pinctrl_baytrail, instead of affecting just the drivers
> > > that explicitly depend on that, it affects others which we are unable to
> > > easily identify.
> >
> > So how do you propose we describe the dependency? It is completely in
> > firmware. Should we make i2c-hid.c dependent on pinctrl-baytrail.c just
> > because some underlying firmware method (_PSx for example) needs the
> > GPIO but the driver itself does not?
>
> i2c-hid.c should fail, WARN, yell, scream or whatever :)
> This way one could say: hey, we needed GPIO.
But i2c-hid.c does not know anything about GPIOS in the first place.
Like I said the dependency is in the firmware level. It may need GPIOs
to do something or not but the driver never sees those GPIOs.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-11-04 19:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1412355319-18946-1-git-send-email-david.a.cohen@linux.intel.com>
2014-10-13 18:23 ` [PATCH] pinctrl: baytrail: show output gpio state correctly on Intel Baytrail David Cohen
2014-10-13 19:14 ` Felipe Balbi
2014-10-13 19:24 ` David Cohen
2014-10-13 19:26 ` Felipe Balbi
2014-10-13 19:36 ` Felipe Balbi
2014-10-13 20:19 ` David Cohen
2014-10-28 10:15 ` Linus Walleij
2014-10-28 14:42 ` Felipe Balbi
2014-10-31 8:12 ` Linus Walleij
2014-10-31 13:20 ` Felipe Balbi
2014-10-31 16:23 ` David Cohen
2014-10-31 18:45 ` David Cohen
2014-11-03 9:24 ` Mika Westerberg
2014-11-03 15:00 ` Felipe Balbi
2014-11-03 15:27 ` Mika Westerberg
2014-11-03 15:35 ` Felipe Balbi
2014-11-03 15:42 ` Mika Westerberg
2014-11-03 15:50 ` Felipe Balbi
2014-11-03 18:42 ` Mika Westerberg
2014-11-03 20:40 ` Felipe Balbi
2014-11-04 7:51 ` Mika Westerberg
2014-11-04 14:44 ` Felipe Balbi
2014-11-03 22:19 ` David Cohen
2014-11-04 7:59 ` Mika Westerberg
2014-11-04 18:05 ` David Cohen
2014-11-04 18:57 ` Mika Westerberg
2014-11-04 19:11 ` David Cohen
2014-11-04 19:34 ` Mika Westerberg [this message]
2014-11-04 21:51 ` David Cohen
2014-11-05 8:40 ` Mika Westerberg
2014-11-14 9:40 ` Linus Walleij
2014-11-14 9:39 ` Linus Walleij
2014-11-14 9:53 ` Mika Westerberg
2014-11-14 23:19 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-11-14 9:30 ` Linus Walleij
2014-11-03 15:33 ` Linus Walleij
2014-10-13 20:16 ` David Cohen
2014-10-14 17:54 ` [PATCH v2] " David Cohen
2014-10-14 18:19 ` Felipe Balbi
2014-10-28 10:17 ` 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=20141104193424.GT1618@lahna.fi.intel.com \
--to=mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com \
--cc=balbi@ti.com \
--cc=david.a.cohen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).