Received: by 10.223.185.116 with SMTP id b49csp7933235wrg; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 13:51:28 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELt4RLRkNog4xH0gMK+QDi0ugtetfrCUYYmHi8cAkO5byjnsY3SWT8QZbrZFBEbcpifYOJbC X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:7044:: with SMTP id h4-v6mr3148709plt.378.1519941088078; Thu, 01 Mar 2018 13:51:28 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1519941088; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=Z0HQ/sx95Q/tYKAhzqQSOWieiBxXIOkwOEKSnRKIIKNWu1md8SIr9t/081Mk8qlkKP ZN3Tj3X4Kn08Q0VMFWSWeloRYdCxhJKRfAWHJqRBAmRpwgbQxfGisfmbAY7UzsdvpcAp dtY8xDWx5x1M7gtAZo+PTGFZwIlqK4D32zFX7sspx/t8ApN8VbTSiqMIIu6zKg15lnc/ hFBKmmHHc63TjcxEy7WK8FkzDDSqTg1R4dXmaiJg43+J8u4SRv0ySWLgdVIFgAlH7KN+ fEYNBw8aUC/D+F7qR8k3pEuz6rO+Y7sf/gc+RqvkBHa9UjjVblZKe1IA+WWLEN+z1Z3V uD8g== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:date:subject:user-agent:message-id :references:cc:in-reply-to:from:to:content-transfer-encoding :mime-version:dmarc-filter:arc-authentication-results; bh=Tf8Lb1nF7v+JAx1kgboZktGUiXReoWBbkt37k+jru4U=; b=OMqN3vlh2Bqs7eSY86gziuILhWTInYWewERhAF2NzafWETArCPC0kIsF78n60Fr9Ne hydHdM42B1xqXlIrsUAZzSwZ9L+bhJ9c+2MgU20quDDMPPYo1ChKvpDBz2RRA+z+uq+y II4VvGLMu/SbZq2AcMOvHrcWV0UjEuwR8bKlclH82QxMRccFcC6LrcEVob6RpXw4Wzf7 UESY7WlohZzHmwg00xsoB62lepiYVCkpWzqMzpOPXl6LalzB+CJuV8zv26kaLpg4IFCq J5325USDqV+aFOLyKE9hK7FEQlFcvdXgVdaLmD/9fWGYqcOjXTP1EoJEUdVf3oQIIvoM tXVQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id a2si3590657pfa.46.2018.03.01.13.51.12; Thu, 01 Mar 2018 13:51:28 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1162308AbeCAVuE convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 1 Mar 2018 16:50:04 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:51828 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1162201AbeCAVt7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Mar 2018 16:49:59 -0500 Received: from localhost (unknown [104.132.1.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5888B20685; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 21:49:57 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 5888B20685 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=sboyd@kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT To: Linus Walleij From: Stephen Boyd In-Reply-To: Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, Timur Tabi , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Bjorn Andersson , Grant Likely , linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, Andy Shevchenko , Linux ARM References: <20180126011400.2191-1-sboyd@codeaurora.org> <20180126011400.2191-3-sboyd@codeaurora.org> Message-ID: <151994099669.240031.102662015980326125@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com> User-Agent: alot/0.7 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] gpiolib-of: Support 'reserved-gpio-ranges' property Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2018 13:49:56 -0800 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Quoting Linus Walleij (2018-02-07 05:34:19) > Hi Stephen, > > nice work! > > On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 2:13 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > > For now, we plumb this into the gpiochip irq APIs so that > > GPIO/pinctrl drivers can use the gpiochip_irqchip_irq_valid() to > > test validity of GPIOs. > > But is that the right thing to do, given that we just took the > trouble to define a DT binding that is explicitly about > any GPIO, not just IRQ capable ones? > > I am worries that the *irq* infix etc on these functions > will be a bit confusing. > > Is it a lot of work to make it just generic and maybe bake it > into the gpio_chip so as to refuse already in > gpiod_request_commit() in gpiolib already? I don't think that it will be too much work to tweak the code to treat these as gpios instead of irq lines. It may end up duplicating a bit of code that the irq line stuff is already doing, but I'll take a stab at it and see how bad it comes out.