| Message ID | 1224773378.4082.64.camel@galileo.recco.de (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Rejected, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Thursday 23 October 2008, Wolfgang Ocker wrote: > The GPIOLIB allows the specification of a base gpio number for a > controller. That is not possible using OF. Instead, free gpio numbers > are assigned. > > In order to allow static, predefined gpio numbers, a base property in > the gpio controller node specifies the first gpio number. > > v2, v3: added/improved description of base property in doc These version descriptions are better placed below the "---" line. And you should remove the "Re: " from the subject line. Other than this: Acked-by: Stefan Roese <sr@denx.de> > Signed-off-by: Wolfgang Ocker <weo@reccoware.de> > --- Best regards, Stefan
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 08:13:00PM +0200, Stefan Roese wrote: > On Thursday 23 October 2008, Wolfgang Ocker wrote: > > The GPIOLIB allows the specification of a base gpio number for a > > controller. That is not possible using OF. Instead, free gpio numbers > > are assigned. > > > > In order to allow static, predefined gpio numbers, a base property in > > the gpio controller node specifies the first gpio number. > > > > v2, v3: added/improved description of base property in doc > > These version descriptions are better placed below the "---" line. And you > should remove the "Re: " from the subject line. Other than this: > > Acked-by: Stefan Roese <sr@denx.de> Please-defer-this-patch-by: Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@ru.mvista.com> Wolfgang, Stefan, see this comment: http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2008-October/064505.html ..just tell me what are you trying to solve. Thanks,
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 10:54 AM, Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@ru.mvista.com> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 08:13:00PM +0200, Stefan Roese wrote: >> On Thursday 23 October 2008, Wolfgang Ocker wrote: >> > The GPIOLIB allows the specification of a base gpio number for a >> > controller. That is not possible using OF. Instead, free gpio numbers >> > are assigned. >> > >> > In order to allow static, predefined gpio numbers, a base property in >> > the gpio controller node specifies the first gpio number. >> > >> > v2, v3: added/improved description of base property in doc >> >> These version descriptions are better placed below the "---" line. And you >> should remove the "Re: " from the subject line. Other than this: >> >> Acked-by: Stefan Roese <sr@denx.de> > > Please-defer-this-patch-by: Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@ru.mvista.com> > > Wolfgang, Stefan, see this comment: > > http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2008-October/064505.html > > ..just tell me what are you trying to solve. Yeah, I don't like this patch either. GPIO numbering is a Linux internal detail and has no bearing on the hardware description. If you need to know what a particular gpio number is then it should be resolved by finding the device tree node; not by trying to fix a GPIO controller to a particular number. g.
On Fri, 2008-10-24 at 11:12 -0600, Grant Likely wrote: > On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 10:54 AM, Anton Vorontsov > <avorontsov@ru.mvista.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 08:13:00PM +0200, Stefan Roese wrote: > >> On Thursday 23 October 2008, Wolfgang Ocker wrote: > >> > The GPIOLIB allows the specification of a base gpio number for a > >> > controller. That is not possible using OF. Instead, free gpio numbers > >> > are assigned. > >> > > >> > In order to allow static, predefined gpio numbers, a base property in > >> > the gpio controller node specifies the first gpio number. > >> > > >> > v2, v3: added/improved description of base property in doc > >> > >> These version descriptions are better placed below the "---" line. And you > >> should remove the "Re: " from the subject line. Other than this: > >> > >> Acked-by: Stefan Roese <sr@denx.de> > Yeah, I don't like this patch either. GPIO numbering is a Linux > internal detail and has no bearing on the hardware description. If > you need to know what a particular gpio number is then it should be > resolved by finding the device tree node; not by trying to fix a GPIO > controller to a particular number. Okay, now I think I understand. I'll try to solve the chip select pin addressing in the spi driver differently. Thank you guys! Wolfgang
--- linux-2.6.27.2/drivers/of/gpio.c.of_gpiospecbase 2008-10-18 19:57:22.000000000 +0200 +++ linux-2.6.27.2/drivers/of/gpio.c 2008-10-23 10:55:19.000000000 +0200 @@ -164,6 +164,8 @@ int ret = -ENOMEM; struct of_gpio_chip *of_gc = &mm_gc->of_gc; struct gpio_chip *gc = &of_gc->gc; + const int *basep; + int baselen; gc->label = kstrdup(np->full_name, GFP_KERNEL); if (!gc->label) @@ -173,7 +175,11 @@ if (!mm_gc->regs) goto err1; - gc->base = -1; + basep = of_get_property(np, "base", &baselen); + if (!basep || baselen != sizeof(*basep)) + gc->base = -1; + else + gc->base = *basep; if (!of_gc->xlate) of_gc->xlate = of_gpio_simple_xlate; --- linux-2.6.27.2/Documentation/powerpc/booting-without-of.txt.of_gpiospecbase 2008-10-18 19:57:22.000000000 +0200 +++ linux-2.6.27.2/Documentation/powerpc/booting-without-of.txt 2008-10-23 16:45:06.000000000 +0200 @@ -2580,12 +2582,17 @@ Every GPIO controller node must have #gpio-cells property defined, this information will be used to translate gpio-specifiers. +Optional properties: + base: first GPIO number handled by this controller; if the property + does not exist, the first GPIO number is allocated dynamicly + Example of two SOC GPIO banks defined as gpio-controller nodes: qe_pio_a: gpio-controller@1400 { #gpio-cells = <2>; compatible = "fsl,qe-pario-bank-a", "fsl,qe-pario-bank"; reg = <0x1400 0x18>; + base = < 0x20 >; gpio-controller; };
The GPIOLIB allows the specification of a base gpio number for a controller. That is not possible using OF. Instead, free gpio numbers are assigned. In order to allow static, predefined gpio numbers, a base property in the gpio controller node specifies the first gpio number. v2, v3: added/improved description of base property in doc Signed-off-by: Wolfgang Ocker <weo@reccoware.de> ---