[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <bc1b5f1d-23b0-141d-f58f-b54ac303fe20@st.com>
Date: Wed, 22 May 2019 09:20:17 +0000
From: Amelie DELAUNAY <amelie.delaunay@...com>
To: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
CC: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Alexandre TORGUE <alexandre.torgue@...com>,
Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com"
<linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com>,
"kbuild-all@...org" <kbuild-all@...org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: stmfx: Fix compile issue when CONFIG_OF_GPIO is
not defined
On 5/22/19 10:41 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Wed, 22 May 2019, Amelie DELAUNAY wrote:
>> On 5/22/19 7:48 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
>>> On Mon, 20 May 2019, Amelie Delaunay wrote:
>>>
>>>> When CONFIG_GPIO_OF is not defined, struct gpio_chip 'of_node' member does
>>>> not exist:
>>>> drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-stmfx.c: In function 'stmfx_pinctrl_probe':
>>>> drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-stmfx.c:652:17: error: 'struct gpio_chip' has no member named 'of_node'
>>>> pctl->gpio_chip.of_node = np;
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: 1490d9f841b1 ("pinctrl: Add STMFX GPIO expander Pinctrl/GPIO driver")
>>>> Reported-by: kbuild test robot <lkp@...el.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Amelie Delaunay <amelie.delaunay@...com>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-stmfx.c | 2 ++
>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-stmfx.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-stmfx.c
>>>> index eba872c..bb64aa0 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-stmfx.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-stmfx.c
>>>> @@ -648,7 +648,9 @@ static int stmfx_pinctrl_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>> pctl->gpio_chip.base = -1;
>>>> pctl->gpio_chip.ngpio = pctl->pctl_desc.npins;
>>>> pctl->gpio_chip.can_sleep = true;
>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_OF_GPIO
>>>> pctl->gpio_chip.of_node = np;
>>>> +#endif
>>>
>>> This is pretty ugly. Will STMFX ever be used without OF support? If
>>> not, it might be better to place this restriction on the driver as a
>>> whole.
>>>
>>> Incidentally, why is this blanked out in the structure definition?
>>> Even 'struct device' doesn't do this.
>>>
>> config PINCTRL_STMFX
>> tristate "STMicroelectronics STMFX GPIO expander pinctrl driver"
>> depends on I2C
>> depends on OF || COMPILE_TEST
>> select GENERIC_PINCONF
>> select GPIOLIB_IRQCHIP
>> select MFD_STMFX
>>
>> The issue is due to COMPILE_TEST: would "depends on OF || (OF &&
>> COMPILE_TEST)" be better ?
>
> Linus would be in a better position to respond, but from what I can
> see, maybe:
>
> depends on OF || (OF_GPIO && COMPILE_TEST)
>
> Although, I'm unsure why other COMPILE_TESTs haven't highlighted this
> issue. Perhaps because they have all been locked down to a particular
> arch:
>
> $ grep COMPILE_TEST -- drivers/pinctrl/Kconfig
> bool "Support pin multiplexing controllers" if COMPILE_TEST
> bool "Support pin configuration controllers" if COMPILE_TEST
> depends on OF && (ARCH_DAVINCI_DA850 || COMPILE_TEST)
> depends on OF && (ARCH_DIGICOLOR || COMPILE_TEST)
> depends on OF && (ARCH_LPC18XX || COMPILE_TEST)
> depends on ARCH_R7S72100 || COMPILE_TEST
> depends on ARCH_R7S9210 || COMPILE_TEST
> depends on ARCH_RZN1 || COMPILE_TEST
> depends on MIPS || COMPILE_TEST
>
> What about adding this to your Kconfig entry:
>
> select OF_GPIO
>
Yes COMPILE_TEST is combined with arch when depending on OF. But STMFX
isn't arch dependent, it is just OF and I2C dependent.
Randy also see a build error in pinctrl-stmfx.c when CONFIG_OF is not
set/enabled (randconfig):
../drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-stmfx.c:409:20: error:
‘pinconf_generic_dt_node_to_map_pin’ undeclared here (not in a function)
.dt_node_to_map = pinconf_generic_dt_node_to_map_pin,
OF_GPIO depends on OF.
So either
depends on OF || (OF && COMPILE_TEST)
or
depends on OF || (OF_GPIO && COMPILE_TEST)
and
select OF_GPIO
What is the prettiest way ?
>>>> pctl->gpio_chip.need_valid_mask = true;
>>>>
>>>> ret = devm_gpiochip_add_data(pctl->dev, &pctl->gpio_chip, pctl);
>>>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists