mbox series

[00/11] Add support for software nodes to gpiolib

Message ID 20190911075215.78047-1-dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com
Headers show
Series Add support for software nodes to gpiolib | expand

Message

Dmitry Torokhov Sept. 11, 2019, 7:52 a.m. UTC 
This series attempts to add support for software nodes to gpiolib, using
software node references that were introduced recently. This allows us
to convert more drivers to the generic device properties and drop
support for custom platform data:

static const struct software_node gpio_bank_b_node = {
|-------.name = "B",
};

static const struct property_entry simone_key_enter_props[] = {
|-------PROPERTY_ENTRY_U32("linux,code", KEY_ENTER),
|-------PROPERTY_ENTRY_STRING("label", "enter"),
|-------PROPERTY_ENTRY_REF("gpios", &gpio_bank_b_node, 123, GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW),
|-------{ }
};

If we agree in principle, I would like to have the very first 3 patches
in an immutable branch off maybe -rc8 so that it can be pulled into
individual subsystems so that patches switching various drivers to
fwnode_gpiod_get_index() could be applied.

Thanks,
Dmitry

Dmitry Torokhov (11):
  gpiolib: of: add a fallback for wlf,reset GPIO name
  gpiolib: introduce devm_fwnode_gpiod_get_index()
  gpiolib: introduce fwnode_gpiod_get_index()
  net: phylink: switch to using fwnode_gpiod_get_index()
  net: mdio: switch to using fwnode_gpiod_get_index()
  drm/bridge: ti-tfp410: switch to using fwnode_gpiod_get_index()
  gpliolib: make fwnode_get_named_gpiod() static
  gpiolib: of: tease apart of_find_gpio()
  gpiolib: of: tease apart acpi_find_gpio()
  gpiolib: consolidate fwnode GPIO lookups
  gpiolib: add support for software nodes

 drivers/gpio/Makefile              |   1 +
 drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c        | 153 ++++++++++++++----------
 drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.h        |  21 ++--
 drivers/gpio/gpiolib-devres.c      |  33 ++----
 drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c          | 159 ++++++++++++++-----------
 drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.h          |  26 ++--
 drivers/gpio/gpiolib-swnode.c      |  92 +++++++++++++++
 drivers/gpio/gpiolib-swnode.h      |  13 ++
 drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c             | 184 ++++++++++++++++-------------
 drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-tfp410.c |   4 +-
 drivers/net/phy/mdio_bus.c         |   4 +-
 drivers/net/phy/phylink.c          |   4 +-
 include/linux/gpio/consumer.h      |  53 ++++++---
 13 files changed, 471 insertions(+), 276 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 drivers/gpio/gpiolib-swnode.c
 create mode 100644 drivers/gpio/gpiolib-swnode.h

Comments

Andy Shevchenko Sept. 11, 2019, 5:13 p.m. UTC | #1 
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 12:52:04AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> This series attempts to add support for software nodes to gpiolib, using
> software node references that were introduced recently. This allows us
> to convert more drivers to the generic device properties and drop
> support for custom platform data:
> 
> static const struct software_node gpio_bank_b_node = {
> |-------.name = "B",
> };
> 
> static const struct property_entry simone_key_enter_props[] = {
> |-------PROPERTY_ENTRY_U32("linux,code", KEY_ENTER),
> |-------PROPERTY_ENTRY_STRING("label", "enter"),
> |-------PROPERTY_ENTRY_REF("gpios", &gpio_bank_b_node, 123, GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW),
> |-------{ }
> };
> 
> If we agree in principle, I would like to have the very first 3 patches
> in an immutable branch off maybe -rc8 so that it can be pulled into
> individual subsystems so that patches switching various drivers to
> fwnode_gpiod_get_index() could be applied.

FWIW,
Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>

for patches 1-8 after addressing minor issues.
I'll review the rest later on.

> 
> Thanks,
> Dmitry
> 
> Dmitry Torokhov (11):
>   gpiolib: of: add a fallback for wlf,reset GPIO name
>   gpiolib: introduce devm_fwnode_gpiod_get_index()
>   gpiolib: introduce fwnode_gpiod_get_index()
>   net: phylink: switch to using fwnode_gpiod_get_index()
>   net: mdio: switch to using fwnode_gpiod_get_index()
>   drm/bridge: ti-tfp410: switch to using fwnode_gpiod_get_index()
>   gpliolib: make fwnode_get_named_gpiod() static
>   gpiolib: of: tease apart of_find_gpio()
>   gpiolib: of: tease apart acpi_find_gpio()
>   gpiolib: consolidate fwnode GPIO lookups
>   gpiolib: add support for software nodes
> 
>  drivers/gpio/Makefile              |   1 +
>  drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c        | 153 ++++++++++++++----------
>  drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.h        |  21 ++--
>  drivers/gpio/gpiolib-devres.c      |  33 ++----
>  drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c          | 159 ++++++++++++++-----------
>  drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.h          |  26 ++--
>  drivers/gpio/gpiolib-swnode.c      |  92 +++++++++++++++
>  drivers/gpio/gpiolib-swnode.h      |  13 ++
>  drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c             | 184 ++++++++++++++++-------------
>  drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-tfp410.c |   4 +-
>  drivers/net/phy/mdio_bus.c         |   4 +-
>  drivers/net/phy/phylink.c          |   4 +-
>  include/linux/gpio/consumer.h      |  53 ++++++---
>  13 files changed, 471 insertions(+), 276 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 drivers/gpio/gpiolib-swnode.c
>  create mode 100644 drivers/gpio/gpiolib-swnode.h
> 
> -- 
> 2.23.0.162.g0b9fbb3734-goog
>
Linus Walleij Sept. 12, 2019, 9:55 a.m. UTC | #2 
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 8:52 AM Dmitry Torokhov
<dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote:

> If we agree in principle, I would like to have the very first 3 patches
> in an immutable branch off maybe -rc8 so that it can be pulled into
> individual subsystems so that patches switching various drivers to
> fwnode_gpiod_get_index() could be applied.

I think it seems a bit enthusiastic to have non-GPIO subsystems
pick up these changes this close to the merge window so my plan
is to merge patches 1.2.3 (1 already merged) and then you could
massage the other subsystems in v5.4-rc1.

But if other subsystems say "hey we want do fix this in like 3 days"
then I'm game for an immutable branch as well.

Yours,
Linus Walleij
Dmitry Torokhov Sept. 17, 2019, 12:22 a.m. UTC | #3 
On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 10:55:47AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 8:52 AM Dmitry Torokhov
> <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > If we agree in principle, I would like to have the very first 3 patches
> > in an immutable branch off maybe -rc8 so that it can be pulled into
> > individual subsystems so that patches switching various drivers to
> > fwnode_gpiod_get_index() could be applied.
> 
> I think it seems a bit enthusiastic to have non-GPIO subsystems
> pick up these changes this close to the merge window so my plan
> is to merge patches 1.2.3 (1 already merged) and then you could
> massage the other subsystems in v5.4-rc1.
> 
> But if other subsystems say "hey we want do fix this in like 3 days"
> then I'm game for an immutable branch as well.

No, if it is still has a chance for -rc1 then I'm good. I was thinking
if it does not go into -rc1 I could convince some of them merge a
targeted immutable branch off -rc8 or 5.3 final and then apply patches
relevant to their subsystems so we do not have to wait till 5.6 to land
everything.

Thanks.
Dmitry Torokhov Sept. 30, 2019, 10:44 p.m. UTC | #4 
Hi Linus,

On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 05:22:07PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 10:55:47AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 8:52 AM Dmitry Torokhov
> > <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > If we agree in principle, I would like to have the very first 3 patches
> > > in an immutable branch off maybe -rc8 so that it can be pulled into
> > > individual subsystems so that patches switching various drivers to
> > > fwnode_gpiod_get_index() could be applied.
> > 
> > I think it seems a bit enthusiastic to have non-GPIO subsystems
> > pick up these changes this close to the merge window so my plan
> > is to merge patches 1.2.3 (1 already merged) and then you could
> > massage the other subsystems in v5.4-rc1.
> > 
> > But if other subsystems say "hey we want do fix this in like 3 days"
> > then I'm game for an immutable branch as well.
> 
> No, if it is still has a chance for -rc1 then I'm good. I was thinking
> if it does not go into -rc1 I could convince some of them merge a
> targeted immutable branch off -rc8 or 5.3 final and then apply patches
> relevant to their subsystems so we do not have to wait till 5.6 to land
> everything.

So I guess we missed -rc1. Any chance we could get an immutable branch
off -rc1 that you will pull into your main branch and I hopefully can
persuade other maintainers to pull as well so we do not need to drag it
over 2+ merge windows?

Thanks.
Linus Walleij Oct. 4, 2019, 9:44 p.m. UTC | #5 
On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 12:45 AM Dmitry Torokhov
<dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote:

> So I guess we missed -rc1. Any chance we could get an immutable branch
> off -rc1 that you will pull into your main branch and I hopefully can
> persuade other maintainers to pull as well so we do not need to drag it
> over 2+ merge windows?

Yes I'm sorry. I was swamped with stabilizing the kernel.
I made an immutable branch and tried to use zeroday for testing
but it timed out so I folded it in for-next anyways after som basic
tests.

Yours,
Linus Walleij