[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200810161006.21276.david-b@pacbell.net>
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 10:06:21 -0700
From: David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net>
To: avorontsov@...mvista.com
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] gpiolib: fix oops in gpio_get_value_cansleep()
On Thursday 16 October 2008, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> > - return chip->get(chip, gpio - chip->base);
> > + return chip->get ? chip->get(chip, gpio - chip->base) : 0;
>
> Why don't we check the .set in the gpio_set_value? Because
> we must always call gpio_direction_output()?
Yes. The output driver needs to be explicitly enabled,
to avoid misbehaving electic circuitry.
> It is not exactly the
> same we work with the input direction.. is this documented anywhere?
In Documentation/gpio.txt since the very first versions.
See the section on "Spinlock-Safe GPIO access", where
special cases for reading the value of output GPIOs are
desribed. Other aspects are mentioned in other spots.
For example, open drain signals -- as used with I2C and
other protocols -- only drive the "low" signal level,
and if code wants a "high" level it's got to verify that
nobody else is driving that shared line to low. By
reading it back, even though it's configured as output.
- Dave
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists