On 9/7/23 12:57 AM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 9:17 AM Linus Walleij <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 5, 2023 at 8:53 PM Bartosz Golaszewski <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <[email protected]>
>>>
>>> Let's start adding getters for the opaque struct gpio_device. Start with
>>> a function allowing to retrieve the base GPIO number.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <[email protected]>
>>
>> I guess you have a solid usecase for drivers needing to do this
>> crazy thing, because I suppose you feel as much as me that
>> this should rather be gpiolib-internal and confined to
>> drivers/gpio/gpiolib.h?
>>
>> If you add a valid reason for making this globally visible outside
>> of drivers/[gpio|pinctrl] to the commit message I guess I can live
>> with it because we need to think of the bigger picture:
>> Acked-by: Linus Walleij <[email protected]>
>>
>> It brings to mind the now confusing "base" inside of
>> struct gpio_chip. We all know it should go away, but since it
>> is never used during the lifetime of the gpio_chip - or SHOULD
>> never be used - it should rather be an argument to
>> [devm_]gpiochip_add_data( .... int base);...
>>
>> Maybe something we should add to our TODO file.
>>
>> Yours,
>> Linus Walleij
>
> For this series it's the HTE driver that uses it and I don't have a
> good idea about how to change it. Dipen?
Missed responding to this, apologies. I believe we are having similar
discussion in the hte only patch. We can continue discussing there.
>
> I would also love to make pinctrl not use the internal GPIOLIB header
> so it'll be another user, unless you can figure out a way to not use
> gc->base? :)
>
> I think we're stuck with it for now.
>
> Bart