[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y5DbKNI3e+tFA++1@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2022 18:27:52 +0000
From: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To: Jonathan Neuschäfer <j.neuschaefer@....net>
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@...e.fr>,
Haojian Zhuang <haojian.zhuang@...il.com>,
Daniel Mack <daniel@...que.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: PXA25x: GPIO driver fails probe due to resource conflict with
pinctrl driver
On Wed, Dec 07, 2022 at 05:44:58PM +0100, Jonathan Neuschäfer wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 07, 2022 at 03:41:11PM +0000, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 07, 2022 at 04:28:07PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> [...]
> > > How are the registers arranged?
> >
> > As documented in drivers/gpio/gpio-pxa.c - it'll be easier for you to
> > look there rather than for me to explain it - but suffice it to say
> > that the pinctrl registers are amongst the GPIO registers.
> >
> > > Is 0x40e00000-0x40e0ffff simply too
> > > large, and making it smaller would fix the issue? Or are the registers
> > > interleaved?
> >
> > They're interleaved. Looking at the .dtsi file for PXA25x, it seems
> > that the pinctrl claims just the addresses that it needs, but the GPIO
> > controller has no reg property in the .dtsi, so I'm not sure what fills
> > that information in.
>
> The GPIO reg property is in pxa2xx.dtsi.
Looks to me like pxa25x should override the reg property with a smaller
range (0x54) and pxa27x probably should have used a second set of
entries in reg the subsequent group of 3 gpio blocks at offset 0x100.
--
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 40Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists