[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2898aafa-e185-8ad5-5f7f-9b81d4a36a8f@codeaurora.org>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 10:09:50 -0500
From: Timur Tabi <timur@...eaurora.org>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Sebastian Gottschall <s.gottschall@...wrt.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@...rosoft.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.16 269/272] pinctrl: msm: Use dynamic GPIO numbering
On 5/31/18 7:12 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> Why is it somehow ok for "future" kernels? You can't break the api in
> the future for no reason.
>
> So this needs to be the same everywhere. If it is broken in 4.17-rc, it
> needs to be reverted.
This was discussed here:
https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-arm-msm/msg32572.html
The code can't program the value to 0 *and* support multiple TLMM
devices at the same time. Prior to 4.18, it is not possible to support
multiple TLMMs anyway, so blindly setting the base to -1 in the 4.17
kernel just breaks existing user-space code that uses the legacy GPIO API.
(This patch in 4.18 is what provides support for multiple TLMMs:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/commit/drivers/pinctrl/qcom?id=f265e8b91bb50c7a732a171ddaeb0eef143bacd9)
So you can see in the thread that I proposed a compromise:
https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-arm-msm/msg32596.html
but that was rejected
--
Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm
Technologies, Inc. Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the
Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists