[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdVv+FRnf6fvjEeu50W5PB-Gh2V8Th1h__vt6guMwk2xNQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2020 09:06:32 +0100
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To: Khouloud Touil <ktouil@...libre.com>
Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
baylibre-upstreaming@...ups.io,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS"
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux I2C <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] nvmem: add support for the write-protect pin
Hi Khouloud,
On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 10:30 AM Khouloud Touil <ktouil@...libre.com> wrote:
> The write-protect pin handling looks like a standard property that
> could benefit other users if available in the core nvmem framework.
>
> Instead of modifying all the memory drivers to check this pin, make
> the NVMEM subsystem check if the write-protect GPIO being passed
> through the nvmem_config or defined in the device tree and pull it
> low whenever writing to the memory.
>
> There was a suggestion for introducing the gpiodesc from pdata, but
> as pdata is already removed it could be replaced by adding it to
> nvmem_config.
>
> Reference: https://lists.96boards.org/pipermail/dev/2018-August/001056.html
>
> Signed-off-by: Khouloud Touil <ktouil@...libre.com>
> Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
> Acked-by: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>
Thanks for your patch!
> --- a/drivers/nvmem/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/nvmem/core.c
> @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@
> #include <linux/module.h>
> #include <linux/nvmem-consumer.h>
> #include <linux/nvmem-provider.h>
> +#include <linux/gpio/consumer.h>
> #include <linux/of.h>
> #include <linux/slab.h>
> #include "nvmem.h"
> @@ -54,8 +55,14 @@ static int nvmem_reg_read(struct nvmem_device *nvmem, unsigned int offset,
> static int nvmem_reg_write(struct nvmem_device *nvmem, unsigned int offset,
> void *val, size_t bytes)
> {
> - if (nvmem->reg_write)
> - return nvmem->reg_write(nvmem->priv, offset, val, bytes);
> + int ret;
> +
> + if (nvmem->reg_write) {
> + gpiod_set_value_cansleep(nvmem->wp_gpio, 0);
> + ret = nvmem->reg_write(nvmem->priv, offset, val, bytes);
> + gpiod_set_value_cansleep(nvmem->wp_gpio, 1);
> + return ret;
> + }
>
> return -EINVAL;
> }
> @@ -338,6 +345,14 @@ struct nvmem_device *nvmem_register(const struct nvmem_config *config)
> kfree(nvmem);
> return ERR_PTR(rval);
> }
> + if (config->wp_gpio)
> + nvmem->wp_gpio = config->wp_gpio;
> + else
> + nvmem->wp_gpio = gpiod_get_optional(config->dev, "wp",
> + GPIOD_OUT_HIGH);
Shouldn't this GPIO be released in nvmem_release(), by calling gpiod_put()?
Once that's implemented, I assume it will be auto-released on registration
failure by the call to put_device()?
> + if (IS_ERR(nvmem->wp_gpio))
> + return PTR_ERR(nvmem->wp_gpio);
> +
>
> kref_init(&nvmem->refcnt);
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&nvmem->cells);
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Powered by blists - more mailing lists