Re: [PATCH 2/3] pinctrl: at91: initialize config parameter to 0
From: Linus Walleij
Date: Thu Dec 12 2013 - 09:38:49 EST
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 9:24 AM, Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> - dev_dbg(info->dev, "%s:%d, pin_id=%d, config=0x%lx", __func__,
>> __LINE__, pin_id, *config);
>> + *config = 0;
>> + dev_dbg(info->dev, "%s:%d, pin_id=%d", __func__, __LINE__,
>> pin_id);
>> pio = pin_to_controller(info, pin_to_bank(pin_id));
>> pin = pin_id % MAX_NB_GPIO_PER_BANK;
>
>
> Beyond this patch, I must say that I am puzzled by this function.
>
> What I read from the prototype documentation and what I see in different
> implementations is different...
Yeah, we need to fix this mess.
> Linus, can we have a review of this function because it seems not in line
> with what is used for u300 (but on the other hand looks like the what is
> returned by pinctrl-exynos5440.c driver for example).
It is supposed to read out one config at the time, if and only if used
with the generic pin config.
Typically:
enum pin_config_param param = (enum pin_config_param) *config;
switch (param) {
case PIN_CONFIG_BIAS_HIGH_IMPEDANCE:
*config = 0;
if (biasmode)
return 0;
else
return -EINVAL;
break;
(...)
return -ENOTSUPP;
However AT91 is *not* using generic pin config, so the semantics of
this call is driver-dependent. In your case the implementation get all
the configs at once, which is an efficient shortcut if you don't need
to be general and enumerat all possible configs.
> What would be the consequences if we change this function's behavior: I mean
> use of -EINVAL for pin configuration "available but disabled" as said in
> include/linux/pinctrl/pinconf.h?
That code will propagate back ... I guess you'd have to test it :-/
Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
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/