linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] dt-bindings: gpio: spacemit: add support for K1 SoC

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CACRpkdZa887vx4Lmxk1U_8w5n7AxMnyzGexeYzhsxNGT-DTYcQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2025 10:18:25 +0100
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To: Yixun Lan <dlan@...too.org>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>, Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>, 
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, 
	Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>, Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>, 
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>, Yangyu Chen <cyy@...self.name>, 
	Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@...nel.org>, Jesse Taube <mr.bossman075@...il.com>, 
	Inochi Amaoto <inochiama@...look.com>, Icenowy Zheng <uwu@...nowy.me>, 
	Meng Zhang <zhangmeng.kevin@...ux.spacemit.com>, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, 
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] dt-bindings: gpio: spacemit: add support for K1 SoC

Hi Yixun,

On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 5:03 PM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 4:17 AM Yixun Lan <dlan@...too.org> wrote:
>
> > [Rob]
> > > If Linux can't handle 1 node for N gpio_chip's, then that's a Linux
> > > problem. Maybe it can, IDK.
> >
> > I haven't seen somthing like this to register 1 node for multi gpio_chips..
> > To gpio/pinctrl maintainer (Linus Walleij), do you have suggestion on this?
>
> For Linux we can call bgpio_init() three times and
> devm_gpiochip_add_data() three times on the result and if we use the
> approach with three cells (where the second is instance 0,1,2 and the
> last one the offset 0..31) then it will work all just the same I guess?
>
> foo-gpios <&gpio 2 7 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>;
>
> for offset 7 on block 2 for example.
>
> We need a custom xlate function I suppose.
>
> It just has not been done that way before, everybody just did
> 2-cell GPIOs.

does this approach work for you? I think it's the most diplomatic.

I'm sorry about the hopeless back-and-forth with the bindings, also
for contributing to the messy debate. I do want developers to feel
encouraged to contribute and not get stuck in too long debates.

Yours,
Linus Walleij