Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752554AbdFLJRo (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2017 05:17:44 -0400 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:16300 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752298AbdFLJRm (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2017 05:17:42 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.39,333,1493708400"; d="scan'208";a="979666506" From: "Mani, Rajmohan" To: Andy Shevchenko , Sakari Ailus CC: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" , Lee Jones , Linus Walleij , "Alexandre Courbot" , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , "Len Brown" Subject: RE: [PATCH v1 2/3] gpio: Add support for TPS68470 GPIOs Thread-Topic: [PATCH v1 2/3] gpio: Add support for TPS68470 GPIOs Thread-Index: AQHS3rzDQNsvvqbo1U++AaPgtQosjaIYVrGAgAai/yCAAQpWgIAAJF0AgAA1JACAADBagIAAbVvQ Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 09:17:38 +0000 Message-ID: <6F87890CF0F5204F892DEA1EF0D77A59725BF45D@FMSMSX114.amr.corp.intel.com> References: <1496750118-5570-1-git-send-email-rajmohan.mani@intel.com> <1496750118-5570-3-git-send-email-rajmohan.mani@intel.com> <6F87890CF0F5204F892DEA1EF0D77A59725BF110@FMSMSX114.amr.corp.intel.com> <20170611113007.GV1019@valkosipuli.retiisi.org.uk> <20170611165028.GA12407@valkosipuli.retiisi.org.uk> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: dlp-product: dlpe-windows dlp-version: 10.0.102.7 dlp-reaction: no-action x-originating-ip: [10.1.200.108] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from base64 to 8bit by mail.home.local id v5C9I2Ma029636 Content-Length: 1270 Lines: 34 Hi Andy, Sakari, > Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] gpio: Add support for TPS68470 GPIOs > > On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 7:50 PM, Sakari Ailus wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 04:40:16PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > >> On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 2:30 PM, Sakari Ailus wrote: > > >> > Again, I'm not really worried about this driver, but the ACPI > >> > tables. How does the difference show there? > >> > >> Same way. You will have common numbering over the chip [0, 9]. It > >> will be just an abstraction inside the driver. > > > > Oh, in that case that should be a non-issue. > > >> Above states the opposite, so, it's clear to me that abstraction of 2 > >> GPIO chips over 1 can be utilized here. > > > > Sounds fine to me, taken that this does not add complications to ACPI > > tables. > > They just need to share the same ACPI_HANDLE (it might require to do this in > generic way in gpiolib) and have a continuous numbering (easy to achieve with > carefully chosen bases). > Few clarifications... Are you implying new kernel changes are needed in gpiolib to accommodate 2 GPIO chips? Does it need changes in platform firmware or is it expected to work just with the gpiolib changes that you described above? Thanks Raj