| Message ID | 1488843122-7960-1-git-send-email-timur@codeaurora.org |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:32 AM, Timur Tabi <timur@codeaurora.org> wrote: > The sysfs and debugfs entries for pin control drivers work better when > the individual pins are given real names, even if they are all just > "gpio0", "gpio1", etc. > > Signed-off-by: Timur Tabi <timur@codeaurora.org> Patch tentatively applied (looks right to me), unless Björn has concerns. Is this a problem in other qcom pinctrl drivers? Yours, Linus Walleij -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Linus Walleij wrote: > Patch tentatively applied (looks right to me), unless Björn has concerns. > > Is this a problem in other qcom pinctrl drivers? Not any of the ones that use pinctrl-msm, because they all use the static arrays, whereas my driver (because it's for ACPI), creates a dynamic array.
On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 3:32 PM, Timur Tabi <timur@codeaurora.org> wrote: > The sysfs and debugfs entries for pin control drivers work better when > the individual pins are given real names, even if they are all just > "gpio0", "gpio1", etc. > Yeah, you do want "name" for those to play nice. Acked-by: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org> Regards, Bjorn -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-qdf2xxx.c b/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-qdf2xxx.c index f448534..bb3ce5c 100644 --- a/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-qdf2xxx.c +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-qdf2xxx.c @@ -35,10 +35,14 @@ /* A reasonable limit to the number of GPIOS */ #define MAX_GPIOS 256 +/* maximum size of each gpio name (enough room for "gpioXXX" + null) */ +#define NAME_SIZE 8 + static int qdf2xxx_pinctrl_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) { struct pinctrl_pin_desc *pins; struct msm_pingroup *groups; + char (*names)[NAME_SIZE]; unsigned int i; u32 num_gpios; int ret; @@ -59,15 +63,21 @@ static int qdf2xxx_pinctrl_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) sizeof(struct pinctrl_pin_desc), GFP_KERNEL); groups = devm_kcalloc(&pdev->dev, num_gpios, sizeof(struct msm_pingroup), GFP_KERNEL); + names = devm_kcalloc(&pdev->dev, num_gpios, NAME_SIZE, GFP_KERNEL); - if (!pins || !groups) + if (!pins || !groups || !names) return -ENOMEM; for (i = 0; i < num_gpios; i++) { + snprintf(names[i], NAME_SIZE, "gpio%u", i); + pins[i].number = i; + pins[i].name = names[i]; - groups[i].npins = 1, + groups[i].npins = 1; + groups[i].name = names[i]; groups[i].pins = &pins[i].number; + groups[i].ctl_reg = 0x10000 * i; groups[i].io_reg = 0x04 + 0x10000 * i; groups[i].intr_cfg_reg = 0x08 + 0x10000 * i;
The sysfs and debugfs entries for pin control drivers work better when the individual pins are given real names, even if they are all just "gpio0", "gpio1", etc. Signed-off-by: Timur Tabi <timur@codeaurora.org> --- drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-qdf2xxx.c | 14 ++++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)