linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: intel: Pass irqchip when adding gpiochip

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20191230102021.GF2628@lahna.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 30 Dec 2019 12:20:21 +0200
From:   Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: intel: Pass irqchip when adding gpiochip

On Sun, Dec 29, 2019 at 02:30:59AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> We need to convert all old gpio irqchips to pass the irqchip
> setup along when adding the gpio_chip. For more info see
> drivers/gpio/TODO.
> 
> Set up the pin ranges using the new callback.

Maybe have this one split as a separate patch? Same what we do for
Baytrail and Cherryview.

> Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
> ---
>  drivers/pinctrl/intel/pinctrl-intel.c | 61 +++++++++++++++------------
>  1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/intel/pinctrl-intel.c b/drivers/pinctrl/intel/pinctrl-intel.c
> index 4860bc9a4e48..ffacd77861f7 100644
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/intel/pinctrl-intel.c
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/intel/pinctrl-intel.c
> @@ -1160,8 +1160,8 @@ static irqreturn_t intel_gpio_irq(int irq, void *data)
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> -static int intel_gpio_add_pin_ranges(struct intel_pinctrl *pctrl,
> -				     const struct intel_community *community)
> +static int intel_gpio_add_community_ranges(struct intel_pinctrl *pctrl,
> +				const struct intel_community *community)
>  {
>  	int ret = 0, i;
>  
> @@ -1181,6 +1181,24 @@ static int intel_gpio_add_pin_ranges(struct intel_pinctrl *pctrl,
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> +static int intel_gpio_add_pin_ranges(struct gpio_chip *gc)
> +{
> +	struct intel_pinctrl *pctrl = gpiochip_get_data(gc);
> +	int ret, i;
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < pctrl->ncommunities; i++) {
> +		struct intel_community *community = &pctrl->communities[i];
> +
> +		ret = intel_gpio_add_community_ranges(pctrl, community);
> +		if (ret) {
> +			dev_err(pctrl->dev, "failed to add GPIO pin range\n");
> +			return ret;
> +		}
> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
>  static unsigned int intel_gpio_ngpio(const struct intel_pinctrl *pctrl)
>  {
>  	const struct intel_community *community;
> @@ -1205,7 +1223,8 @@ static unsigned int intel_gpio_ngpio(const struct intel_pinctrl *pctrl)
>  
>  static int intel_gpio_probe(struct intel_pinctrl *pctrl, int irq)
>  {
> -	int ret, i;
> +	int ret;
> +	struct gpio_irq_chip *girq;

Nit:

Can you order these in "reverse christmas tree" like,

	struct gpio_irq_chip *girq;
	int ret;

Otherwise looks good to me, thanks!