[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMRc=MdR=tADdLmo3grXQq3FjxX7JnWjLBDXSv-j41hv6no-Wg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 09:56:21 +0100
From: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>,
David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
Subject: Re: [RFT PATCH v2 7/8] gpio: exar: switch to using regmap
On Wed, Nov 4, 2020 at 9:35 PM Andy Shevchenko
<andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2020 at 9:34 PM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl> wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > +static const struct regmap_config exar_regmap_config = {
> > + .name = "exar-gpio",
> > + .reg_bits = 8,
> > + .val_bits = 8,
> > +};
>
> Looking at gpio-pca953xx regmap conversion I'm wondering shouldn't you
> provide a callback to define volatile registers (such as GPIO input
> bits)?
>
> --
> With Best Regards,
> Andy Shevchenko
I think this was done in pca953x due to weird calculations of banks
and registers. For a rather simple driver like this one I don't think
this is needed.
Bartosz
Powered by blists - more mailing lists