Re: [PATCH 2/5 v2] Input: bu21013_ts - Move GPIO init and exitfunctions into the driver

[Lee Jones]

On Mon, 26 Nov 2012, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:

> Hi Lee,
> 
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 12:01:43PM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> >  /**
> > + * bu21013_gpio_board_init() - configures the touch panel
> > + * @reset_pin: reset pin number
> > + *
> > + * This function is used to configure the voltage and
> > + * reset the touch panel controller.
> > + */
> > +static int bu21013_gpio_board_init(int reset_pin)
> > +{
> > +	int retval = 0;
> > +
> > +	retval = gpio_request_one(reset_pin, GPIOF_INIT_HIGH, "touchp_reset");
> 
> Also need to specify dircetion (even though it defaults to output).

You do? Okay, I'll do that.

> > +	if (retval) {
> > +		printk(KERN_ERR "Unable to request gpio reset_pin");
> > +		return retval;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	return retval;
> > +}
> > +
> > +/**
> > + * bu21013_gpio_board_exit() - deconfigures the touch panel controller
> > + * @reset_pin: reset pin number
> > + *
> > + * This function is used to deconfigure the chip selection
> > + * for touch panel controller.
> > + */
> > +static int bu21013_gpio_board_exit(int reset_pin)
> > +{
> > +	int retval = 0;
> > +
> > +	retval = gpio_direction_output(reset_pin, 0);
> > +	if (retval < 0) {
> > +		printk(KERN_ERR "%s: gpio direction failed\n",
> > +		       __func__);
> > +		return retval;
> 
> You should not return here, as gpio has to be freed even if you unable
> to toggle it.

You're right.

> > +	}
> > +	gpio_set_value(reset_pin, 0);
> > +	gpio_free(reset_pin);
> > +
> > +	return retval;
> > +}
> > +
> > +/**
> >   * bu21013_init_chip() - power on sequence for the bu21013 controller
> >   * @data: device structure pointer
> >   *
> > @@ -449,6 +493,8 @@ static int __devinit bu21013_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
> >  		return -EINVAL;
> >  	}
> >  
> > +	pdata->irq = gpio_to_irq(pdata->touch_pin);
> > +
> 
> No, you still can not do it since pdata is a const pointer. Does not
> your compiler throw a warning here?
> 
> I already sent you a version of the patch that does not have these
> issues, is there a particular reason why you needed to roll your own
> instead of simply trying out the one I sent?

I didn't see the other patch, sorry.

I'll check my mail and apply it.

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org â Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/