[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <509C990D.50008@nvidia.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 11:17:57 +0530
From: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>
To: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
CC: "linus.walleij@...aro.org" <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
"grant.likely@...retlab.ca" <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio: tegra: read output value when gpio is set in direction_out
On Thursday 08 November 2012 10:28 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 11/07/2012 11:27 PM, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
>> Read the output value when gpio is set for the output mode for
>> gpio_get_value(). Reading input value in direction out does not
>> give correct value.
> That's an unfortunate HW design, but oh well. Do you have any idea why
> reading the input register doesn't work? If you look at the Tegra20 TRM,
> page 666 figure 32 "SFIO/GPIO Pin Multiplexing Architecture", there's
> not indication that the input path wouldn't work if the output path is
> active. Perhaps the issue is in the GPIO module not the pinmux module?
>
I think this is in the gpio controller design. I again check this in
cardhu wih dumping gpio registers
Bank:Port CNF OE OUT IN INT_STA INT_ENB INT_LVL
2:2 1c 18 08 04 00 00 000000
GPIO pin2,pin3 and pin4 are in gpio mode.
GPIO pin 3 and pin4 are in output mode and pin2 is in input mode.
Set the output to 1 for pin3 and reading back through gpio_in register
for this pin, it is showing as 0, not 1.
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-tegra.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-tegra.c
>> static int tegra_gpio_get(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned offset)
>> {
>> + int bit_val = BIT(GPIO_BIT(offset));
>> +
>> + /* If gpio is in output mode then read from the out value */
>> + if (tegra_gpio_readl(GPIO_OE(offset))& bit_val)
>> + return !!(tegra_gpio_readl(GPIO_OUT(offset))& bit_val);
>> +
>> return (tegra_gpio_readl(GPIO_IN(offset))>> GPIO_BIT(offset))& 0x1;
>> }
> Any chance of using the same kind of logic to isolate the bit value? One
> branch above does !!(val& mask) and the other (val>> shift)& 1.
It was going to more than 80 column and hence I did like this. Let me
respin this patch to have same kind of.
--
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