[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9fa1db80-b0ea-68af-c122-49ea0b4315ec@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2016 10:03:53 -0800
From: Steve Longerbeam <slongerbeam@...il.com>
To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>, LW@...O-electronics.de
Cc: Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
Sascha Hauer <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@....com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-media@...r.kernel.org" <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>,
"devel@...verdev.osuosl.org" <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/20] gpio: pca953x: Add optional reset gpio control
Hi Linus, Lothar,
On 12/30/2016 05:17 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 29, 2016 at 11:27 PM, Steve Longerbeam
> <slongerbeam@...il.com> wrote:
>
>> Add optional reset-gpios pin control. If present, de-assert the
>> specified reset gpio pin to bring the chip out of reset.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Steve Longerbeam <steve_longerbeam@...tor.com>
>> Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
>> Cc: Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>
>> Cc: linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org
>> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> This seems like a separate patch from the other 19 patches so please send it
> separately so I can handle logistics easier in the future.
Ok, I'll send the next version separately.
>
>
>> @@ -133,6 +134,7 @@ struct pca953x_chip {
>> const char *const *names;
>> unsigned long driver_data;
>> struct regulator *regulator;
>> + struct gpio_desc *reset_gpio;
> Why do you even keep this around in the device state container?
>
> As you only use it in the probe() function, use a local variable.
>
> The descriptor will be free():ed by the devm infrastructure anyways.
I think my reasoning for putting the gpio handle into the device
struct was for possibly using it for run-time reset control at some
point. But that could be done later if needed, so I'll go ahead and
make it local.
>> + /* see if we need to de-assert a reset pin */
>> + chip->reset_gpio = devm_gpiod_get_optional(&client->dev,
>> + "reset",
>> + GPIOD_OUT_LOW);
>> + if (IS_ERR(chip->reset_gpio)) {
>> + dev_err(&client->dev, "request for reset pin failed\n");
>> + return PTR_ERR(chip->reset_gpio);
>> + }
> Nice.
>
>> + if (chip->reset_gpio) {
>> + /* bring chip out of reset */
>> + dev_info(&client->dev, "releasing reset\n");
>> + gpiod_set_value(chip->reset_gpio, 0);
>> + }
> Is this really needed given that you set it low in the
> devm_gpiod_get_optional()?
Yep, this is left over from a previous iteration, but it isn't needed now.
I'll remove it.
Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists