[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1482103533-13187-1-git-send-email-andrew.smirnov@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2016 15:25:33 -0800
From: Andrey Smirnov <andrew.smirnov@...il.com>
To: linux-wpan@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Andrey Smirnov <andrew.smirnov@...il.com>,
Alexander Aring <aar@...gutronix.de>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Chris Healy <cphealy@...il.com>
Subject: [PATCH] at86rf230: Allow slow GPIO pins for "rstn"
Driver code never touches "rstn" signal in atomic context, so there's
no need to implicitly put such restriction on it by using gpio_set_value
to manipulate it. Replace gpio_set_value to gpio_set_value_cansleep to
fix that.
As a an example of where such restriction might be inconvenient,
consider a hardware design where "rstn" is connected to a pin of I2C/SPI
GPIO expander chip.
Cc: Chris Healy <cphealy@...il.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrey Smirnov <andrew.smirnov@...il.com>
---
drivers/net/ieee802154/at86rf230.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ieee802154/at86rf230.c b/drivers/net/ieee802154/at86rf230.c
index 9f10da6..7700690 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ieee802154/at86rf230.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ieee802154/at86rf230.c
@@ -1710,9 +1710,9 @@ static int at86rf230_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
/* Reset */
if (gpio_is_valid(rstn)) {
udelay(1);
- gpio_set_value(rstn, 0);
+ gpio_set_value_cansleep(rstn, 0);
udelay(1);
- gpio_set_value(rstn, 1);
+ gpio_set_value_cansleep(rstn, 1);
usleep_range(120, 240);
}
--
2.5.5
Powered by blists - more mailing lists