[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20170601121826.14685-3-richard.genoud@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2017 14:18:26 +0200
From: Richard Genoud <richard.genoud@...il.com>
To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc: Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Gregory Clement <gregory.clement@...e-electrons.com>,
Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Ralph Sennhauser <ralph.sennhauser@...il.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
Richard Genoud <richard.genoud@...il.com>
Subject: [PATCHv2 2/2] gpio: mvebu: fix gpio bank registration when pwm is used
If more than one gpio bank has the "pwm" property, only one will be
registered successfully, all the others will fail with:
mvebu-gpio: probe of f1018140.gpio failed with error -17
That's because in alloc_pwms(), the chip->base (aka "int pwm"), was not
set (thus, ==0) ; and 0 is a meaningful start value in alloc_pwm().
What was intended is mvpwm->chip->base = -1.
Like that, the numbering will be done auto-magically
Moreover, as the region might be already occupied by another pwm, we
shouldn't force:
mvpwm->chip->base = 0
nor
mvpwm->chip->base = id * MVEBU_MAX_GPIO_PER_BANK;
Tested on clearfog-pro (Marvell 88F6828)
Fixes: 757642f9a584 ("gpio: mvebu: Add limited PWM support")
Signed-off-by: Richard Genoud <richard.genoud@...il.com>
---
drivers/gpio/gpio-mvebu.c | 7 +++++++
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-mvebu.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-mvebu.c
index cdef2c78cb3b..5104b6398139 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-mvebu.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-mvebu.c
@@ -768,6 +768,13 @@ static int mvebu_pwm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev,
mvpwm->chip.dev = dev;
mvpwm->chip.ops = &mvebu_pwm_ops;
mvpwm->chip.npwm = mvchip->chip.ngpio;
+ /*
+ * There may already be some PWM allocated, so we can't force
+ * mvpwm->chip.base to a fixed point like mvchip->chip.base.
+ * So, we let pwmchip_add() do the numbering and take the next free
+ * region.
+ */
+ mvpwm->chip.base = -1;
spin_lock_init(&mvpwm->lock);
Powered by blists - more mailing lists