The pinconf, pinctrl and pinmux operation structures hold function
pointers that are never modified. Declare them as const.
Signed-off-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
commit af1024e0f7cde9023ddd0f3116db03911d5914c0
"pinctrl: skip deferral of hogs"
Attempts to avoid probe deferral on hogged pins, but we
forgot the device tree case. This patch fixes this.
Cc: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com>
Reported-by: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
The fact that of_gpiochip_add_pin_range() and
gpiochip_add_pin_range() share too much code is fragile and
will invariably mean that bugs need to be fixed in two places
instead of one.
So separate the concerns of gpiolib.c and gpiolib-of.c and
have the latter call the former as back-end. This is necessary
also when going forward with other device descriptions such
as ACPI.
This is done by:
- Adding a return code to gpiochip_add_pin_range() so we can
reliably check whether this succeeds.
- Get rid of the custom of_pinctrl_add_gpio_range() from
pinctrl. Instead create of_pinctrl_get() to just retrive the
pin controller per se from an OF node. This composite
function was just begging to be deleted, it was way to
purpose-specific.
- Use pinctrl_dev_get_name() to get the name of the retrieved
pin controller and use that to call back into the generic
gpiochip_add_pin_range().
Now the pin range is only allocated and tied to a pin
controller from the core implementation in gpiolib.c.
Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
pinctrl subsystem needs gpio chip base to prepare set of gpio
pin ranges, which a given pinctrl driver can handle. This is
important to handle pinctrl gpio request calls in order to
program a given pin properly for gpio operation.
As gpio base is allocated dynamically during gpiochip
registration, presently there exists no clean way to pass this
information to the pinctrl subsystem.
After few discussions from [1], it was concluded that may be
gpio controller reporting the pin range it supports, is a
better way than pinctrl subsystem directly registering it.
[1] http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/184816
Cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Shiraz Hashim <shiraz.hashim@st.com>
[Edited documentation a bit]
Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
If drivers try to obtain pinctrl handles for a pin controller that
has not yet registered to the subsystem, we need to be able to
back out and retry with deferred probing. So let's return
-EPROBE_DEFER whenever this location fails. Also downgrade the
errors to info, maybe we will even set them to debug once the
deferred probing is commonplace.
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Reviewed-by: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Acked-by: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
During pinctrl_get(), if the client device has a device tree node, look
for the common pinctrl properties there. If found, parse the referenced
device tree nodes, with the help of the pinctrl drivers, and generate
mapping table entries from them.
During pinctrl_put(), free any results of device tree parsing.
Acked-by: Dong Aisheng <dong.aisheng@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Laurent Pinchart