2024-02-14 16:28:34

by Théo Lebrun

Subject: [PATCH 17/23] gpio: nomadik: handle variadic GPIO count

Read the "ngpios" device-tree property to determine the number of GPIOs
for a bank. If not available, fallback to NMK_GPIO_PER_CHIP ie 32 ie
the current behavior.

The IP block always supports 32 GPIOs, but platforms can expose a lesser
amount. The Mobileye EyeQ5 is in this case; one bank is 29 GPIOs and
the other is 23.

Signed-off-by: Théo Lebrun <[email protected]>
---
drivers/gpio/gpio-nomadik.c | 9 +++++++--
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-nomadik.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-nomadik.c
index 5b1e3b3efcff..02b53c58adf7 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-nomadik.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-nomadik.c
@@ -490,7 +490,7 @@ struct nmk_gpio_chip *nmk_gpio_populate_chip(struct device_node *np,
struct resource *res;
struct clk *clk;
void __iomem *base;
- u32 id;
+ u32 id, ngpio;

gpio_pdev = of_find_device_by_node(np);
if (!gpio_pdev) {
@@ -518,10 +518,15 @@ struct nmk_gpio_chip *nmk_gpio_populate_chip(struct device_node *np,
return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
}

+ if (of_property_read_u32(np, "ngpios", &ngpio)) {
+ ngpio = NMK_GPIO_PER_CHIP;
+ dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "populate: using default ngpio (%d)\n", ngpio);
+ }
+
nmk_chip->bank = id;
chip = &nmk_chip->chip;
chip->base = -1;
- chip->ngpio = NMK_GPIO_PER_CHIP;
+ chip->ngpio = ngpio;
chip->label = dev_name(&gpio_pdev->dev);
chip->parent = &gpio_pdev->dev;


--
2.43.1

2024-02-20 08:08:28

by Linus Walleij

Subject: Re: [PATCH 17/23] gpio: nomadik: handle variadic GPIO count

On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 5:24 PM Théo Lebrun <[email protected]> wrote:

> Read the "ngpios" device-tree property to determine the number of GPIOs
> for a bank. If not available, fallback to NMK_GPIO_PER_CHIP ie 32 ie
> the current behavior.
>
> The IP block always supports 32 GPIOs, but platforms can expose a lesser
> amount. The Mobileye EyeQ5 is in this case; one bank is 29 GPIOs and
> the other is 23.
>
> Signed-off-by: Théo Lebrun <[email protected]>

LGTM, with Bartosz' comments addressed:
Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <[email protected]>

Yours,
Linus Walleij