Extract the code to add all GPIO hogs of a gpio-hog node into its own
function, so it can be reused.
Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <[email protected]>
---
v2:
- No changes.
---
drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c | 49 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c
index c6d30f73df078e0b..2b47f93886075294 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c
@@ -604,6 +604,35 @@ static struct gpio_desc *of_parse_own_gpio(struct device_node *np,
return desc;
}
+/**
+ * of_gpiochip_add_hog - Add all hogs in a hog device node
+ * @chip: gpio chip to act on
+ * @hog: device node describing the hogs
+ *
+ * Returns error if it fails otherwise 0 on success.
+ */
+static int of_gpiochip_add_hog(struct gpio_chip *chip, struct device_node *hog)
+{
+ enum gpiod_flags dflags;
+ struct gpio_desc *desc;
+ unsigned long lflags;
+ const char *name;
+ unsigned int i;
+ int ret;
+
+ for (i = 0;; i++) {
+ desc = of_parse_own_gpio(hog, chip, i, &name, &lflags, &dflags);
+ if (IS_ERR(desc))
+ break;
+
+ ret = gpiod_hog(desc, name, lflags, dflags);
+ if (ret < 0)
+ return ret;
+ }
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
/**
* of_gpiochip_scan_gpios - Scan gpio-controller for gpio definitions
* @chip: gpio chip to act on
@@ -614,29 +643,17 @@ static struct gpio_desc *of_parse_own_gpio(struct device_node *np,
*/
static int of_gpiochip_scan_gpios(struct gpio_chip *chip)
{
- struct gpio_desc *desc = NULL;
struct device_node *np;
- const char *name;
- unsigned long lflags;
- enum gpiod_flags dflags;
- unsigned int i;
int ret;
for_each_available_child_of_node(chip->of_node, np) {
if (!of_property_read_bool(np, "gpio-hog"))
continue;
- for (i = 0;; i++) {
- desc = of_parse_own_gpio(np, chip, i, &name, &lflags,
- &dflags);
- if (IS_ERR(desc))
- break;
-
- ret = gpiod_hog(desc, name, lflags, dflags);
- if (ret < 0) {
- of_node_put(np);
- return ret;
- }
+ ret = of_gpiochip_add_hog(chip, np);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ of_node_put(np);
+ return ret;
}
}
--
2.17.1
On 2/20/20 7:01 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Extract the code to add all GPIO hogs of a gpio-hog node into its own
> function, so it can be reused.
>
> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <[email protected]>
> ---
> v2:
> - No changes.
> ---
> drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c | 49 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c
> index c6d30f73df078e0b..2b47f93886075294 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c
> @@ -604,6 +604,35 @@ static struct gpio_desc *of_parse_own_gpio(struct device_node *np,
> return desc;
> }
>
> +/**
> + * of_gpiochip_add_hog - Add all hogs in a hog device node
> + * @chip: gpio chip to act on
> + * @hog: device node describing the hogs
> + *
> + * Returns error if it fails otherwise 0 on success.
> + */
> +static int of_gpiochip_add_hog(struct gpio_chip *chip, struct device_node *hog)
> +{
> + enum gpiod_flags dflags;
> + struct gpio_desc *desc;
> + unsigned long lflags;
> + const char *name;
> + unsigned int i;
> + int ret;
> +
> + for (i = 0;; i++) {
> + desc = of_parse_own_gpio(hog, chip, i, &name, &lflags, &dflags);
> + if (IS_ERR(desc))
> + break;
> +
> + ret = gpiod_hog(desc, name, lflags, dflags);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> /**
> * of_gpiochip_scan_gpios - Scan gpio-controller for gpio definitions
> * @chip: gpio chip to act on
> @@ -614,29 +643,17 @@ static struct gpio_desc *of_parse_own_gpio(struct device_node *np,
> */
> static int of_gpiochip_scan_gpios(struct gpio_chip *chip)
> {
> - struct gpio_desc *desc = NULL;
> struct device_node *np;
> - const char *name;
> - unsigned long lflags;
> - enum gpiod_flags dflags;
> - unsigned int i;
> int ret;
>
> for_each_available_child_of_node(chip->of_node, np) {
> if (!of_property_read_bool(np, "gpio-hog"))
> continue;
>
> - for (i = 0;; i++) {
> - desc = of_parse_own_gpio(np, chip, i, &name, &lflags,
> - &dflags);
> - if (IS_ERR(desc))
> - break;
> -
> - ret = gpiod_hog(desc, name, lflags, dflags);
> - if (ret < 0) {
> - of_node_put(np);
> - return ret;
> - }
> + ret = of_gpiochip_add_hog(chip, np);
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + of_node_put(np);
> + return ret;
> }
> }
>
>
Reviewed-by: Frank Rowand <[email protected]>
On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 2:01 PM Geert Uytterhoeven
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Extract the code to add all GPIO hogs of a gpio-hog node into its own
> function, so it can be reused.
>
> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <[email protected]>
> ---
> v2:
> - No changes.
Patch applied with Frank's Review tag.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
Hi Linus, Rob,
On 2/21/20 10:08 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 2:01 PM Geert Uytterhoeven
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Extract the code to add all GPIO hogs of a gpio-hog node into its own
>> function, so it can be reused.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> v2:
>> - No changes.
>
> Patch applied with Frank's Review tag.
I created a devicetree unittest to show the problem that Geert's patches
fix.
I would prefer to have my unittest patch series applied somewhere,
immediately followed by Geert's patch series. This way, after
applying my series, a test fail is reported, then after Geert's
series is applied, the test fail becomes a test pass.
Can you coordinate with Rob to accept both series either via
your tree or Rob's tree?
-Frank
>
> Yours,
> Linus Walleij
>
On 2/21/20 11:18 AM, Frank Rowand wrote:
> Hi Linus, Rob,
>
> On 2/21/20 10:08 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 2:01 PM Geert Uytterhoeven
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Extract the code to add all GPIO hogs of a gpio-hog node into its own
>>> function, so it can be reused.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>> v2:
>>> - No changes.
>>
>> Patch applied with Frank's Review tag.
>
> I created a devicetree unittest to show the problem that Geert's patches
> fix.
I left out the link to my patch series:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/[email protected]/
[PATCH v2 0/2] of: unittest: add overlay gpio test to catch gpio hog problem
-Frank
>
> I would prefer to have my unittest patch series applied somewhere,
> immediately followed by Geert's patch series. This way, after
> applying my series, a test fail is reported, then after Geert's
> series is applied, the test fail becomes a test pass.
>
> Can you coordinate with Rob to accept both series either via
> your tree or Rob's tree?
>
> -Frank
>
>>
>> Yours,
>> Linus Walleij
>>
>
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 6:18 PM Frank Rowand <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2/21/20 10:08 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > Patch applied with Frank's Review tag.
>
> I created a devicetree unittest to show the problem that Geert's patches
> fix.
>
> I would prefer to have my unittest patch series applied somewhere,
> immediately followed by Geert's patch series. This way, after
> applying my series, a test fail is reported, then after Geert's
> series is applied, the test fail becomes a test pass.
>
> Can you coordinate with Rob to accept both series either via
> your tree or Rob's tree?
I see Rob already applied the test.
I do not personally bother much about which order problems
get solved but I guess if Rob can back out the patch I can apply
it to my tree instead, before these patches. for some time,
before I start pulling stuff on top.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
On 2/28/20 4:43 PM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 6:18 PM Frank Rowand <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 2/21/20 10:08 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
>
>>> Patch applied with Frank's Review tag.
>>
>> I created a devicetree unittest to show the problem that Geert's patches
>> fix.
>>
>> I would prefer to have my unittest patch series applied somewhere,
>> immediately followed by Geert's patch series. This way, after
>> applying my series, a test fail is reported, then after Geert's
>> series is applied, the test fail becomes a test pass.
>>
>> Can you coordinate with Rob to accept both series either via
>> your tree or Rob's tree?
>
> I see Rob already applied the test.
>
> I do not personally bother much about which order problems
> get solved but I guess if Rob can back out the patch I can apply
> it to my tree instead, before these patches. for some time,
> before I start pulling stuff on top.
>
> Yours,
> Linus Walleij
>
At this point, if it is a lot of trouble or confusion, I would not
bother undoing the commits that have been done. I'll leave it up
to you and Rob to coordinate if you do decide to undo.
-Frank