[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <d019990e-a725-4ef5-bb54-aadee9d18b86@www.fastmail.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2021 15:13:24 +0930
From: "Andrew Jeffery" <andrew@...id.au>
To: "Andy Shevchenko" <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc: "linux-leds@...r.kernel.org" <linux-leds@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
Cédric Le Goater <clg@...d.org>,
"Rob Herring" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
"Joel Stanley" <joel@....id.au>, "Pavel Machek" <pavel@....cz>,
"Linus Walleij" <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-aspeed@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linux-aspeed@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/6] leds: Fix pca955x GPIO pin mappings
On Fri, 23 Jul 2021, at 17:45, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>
>
> On Friday, July 23, 2021, Andrew Jeffery <andrew@...id.au> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > This series does a bunch of crimes, so it's an RFC. I'm cross-posting to the
> > pinctrl/GPIO and LEDs lists because the PCA955x devices impact all of them. What
> > needs fixing is the leds-pca955x driver's failure to map the GPIO numberspace to
> > the pin numberspace of the PCA955x devices. The series solves that by
> > implementing pinctrl and pinmux in the leds-pca955x driver.
> >
> > Things I'm unsure about:
> >
> > 1. Patch 1: The pinctrl_gpio_as_pin() API feels a bit dirty, not sure what
> > others thoughts are on that (Linus?).
> >
> > 2. Patch 2: I've added a new callback to hook the entirety of the pinctrl map
> > parsing rather than supplying a subnode-specific callback. This was necessary
> > to handle the PCA955x devicetree binding in a backwards compatible way.
> >
> > 3. Patch 4: The PCA955x devices don't actually have any pinmux hardware, but the
> > properties of the pinctrl/pinmux subsystems in the kernel map nicely onto the
> > problem we have. But it's quite a bit of code...
> >
> > 4. Patch 6: I also lost a bunch of time to overlooking the get_group_pins()
> > callback for pinctrl, and it seems odd to me that it isn't required.
> >
> > Please review!
>
>
> Sounds like a hack.
Yes, possibly. Feedback like this is why I sent the series as an RFC.
> I was briefly looking into patches 1-4 and suddenly
> realized that the fix can be similar as in PCA9685 (PWM), I.e. we
> always have chips for the entire pin space and one may map them
> accordingly, requested in one realm (LED) in the other (GPIO)
> automatically is BUSY. Or I missed the point?
No, you haven't missed the point. I will look at the PCA9685 driver.
That said, my goal was to implement the behaviour intended by the
existing binding (i.e. fix a bug). However, userspace would never have
got the results it expected with the existing driver implementation, so
I guess you could argue that no such (useful) userspace exists. Given
that, we could adopt the strategy of always defining a gpiochip
covering the whole pin space, and parts of the devicetree binding just
become redundant.
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists