[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 5 May 2023 11:38:16 +0300
From: Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
To: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@...nade.info>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Aaro Koskinen <aaro.koskinen@....fi>,
linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [BISECTED REGRESSION] OMAP1 GPIO breakage
* Andreas Kemnade <andreas@...nade.info> [230504 12:45]:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, 4 May 2023 14:13:32 +0200
> Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, May 4, 2023 at 7:52 AM Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com> wrote:
> > > * Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com> [230426 07:20]:
> > > > Seems that we should just revert this patch for now and try again after
> > > > the issues have been fixed.
> > >
> > > Looking at the proposed fixes being posted seems like they are quite
> > > intrusive.. How about we partially revert this patch so omap1 still
> > > uses static assigment of gpios?
> >
> > I think Andreas patch (commit 92bf78b33b0b463b00c6b0203b49aea845daecc8)
> > kind of describes the problem with that: the probe order is now unpredictable,
> > so if we revert the patch then that problem returns, but I don't know how
> > serious that problem is.
> >
> well, I think we can even fully revert 92bf78b33b0b463b00c6b0203b49aea845daecc8
> after my patch
>
> gpiolib: fix allocation of mixed dynamic/static GPIOs
>
> is in as a short time solution. That should only leave unpredictable
> numbers of multiple dynamic gpio controllers.
OK thanks sounds good to me.
Regards,
Tony
Powered by blists - more mailing lists