Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756725AbeAHLI5 (ORCPT + 1 other); Mon, 8 Jan 2018 06:08:57 -0500 Received: from mail-vk0-f66.google.com ([209.85.213.66]:45989 "EHLO mail-vk0-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756661AbeAHLIz (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Jan 2018 06:08:55 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBouIz7wbwceVuFoBzS+q6KTeBAdgpzZRURtBPlMfSPOPiDPjLl62SbCjdfJR29l9eUNwwpydRcES6j3sCNhyZUM= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20171213154549.5zn4uxhsssqw3pb7@flea.lan> References: <20171213144748.GA18267@arx-s1> <20171213154549.5zn4uxhsssqw3pb7@flea.lan> From: Hao Zhang Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2018 19:08:53 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/4] ARM: pinctrl: sunxi-pinctrl: fix pin funtion can not be match correctly. To: Maxime Ripard Cc: Thierry Reding , robh+dt@kernel.org, Mark Rutland , linux@armlinux.org.uk, Chen-Yu Tsai , Linus Walleij , open list , "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" , "moderated list:ARM/Allwinner sunXi SoC support" , linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: 2017-12-13 23:45 GMT+08:00 Maxime Ripard : > Hi, > > Thanks for your patch! > > On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 10:47:48PM +0800, hao_zhang wrote: >> Pin function can not be match correctly when SUNXI_PIN describe with >> mutiple variant and same function. >> >> such as: >> on pinctrl-sun4i-a10.c >> >> SUNXI_PIN(SUNXI_PINCTRL_PIN(B, 2), >> SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x0, "gpio_in"), >> SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x1, "gpio_out"), >> SUNXI_FUNCTION_VARIANT(0x2, "pwm", /* PWM0 */ >> PINCTRL_SUN4I_A10 | >> PINCTRL_SUN7I_A20), >> SUNXI_FUNCTION_VARIANT(0x3, "pwm", /* PWM0 */ >> PINCTRL_SUN8I_R40)), >> >> it would always match to the first variant function >> (PINCTRL_SUN4I_A10, PINCTRL_SUN7I_A20) >> >> so we should add variant compare on it. >> >> Signed-off-by: hao_zhang >> --- >> drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-sunxi.c | 6 ++++-- >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-sunxi.c b/drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-sunxi.c >> index 4b6cb25..f23e74e 100644 >> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-sunxi.c >> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-sunxi.c >> @@ -83,9 +83,11 @@ sunxi_pinctrl_desc_find_function_by_name(struct sunxi_pinctrl *pctl, >> struct sunxi_desc_function *func = pin->functions; >> >> while (func->name) { >> - if (!strcmp(func->name, func_name)) >> + if (!strcmp(func->name, func_name)) { >> + if (!(func->variant) || >> + (func->variant & pctl->variant)) > > I guess it would be better to have: > if (!strcmp(func->name, func_name) && > (!func->variant || (func->variant & pctl->variant))) It would over 80 characters, can i change it by this ? if (!strcmp(func->name, func_name) && (func->variant & pctl->variant || !func->variant)) > > Once fixed, > Acked-by: Maxime Ripard > > Thanks! > Maxime > > -- > Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons > Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering > http://free-electrons.com