Re: [PATCH 2/2] gpio: davinci: reuse for Keystone SoC

[Grygorii Strashko]

On 12/16/2013 09:29 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 3:12 AM, Grygorii Strashko
> <grygorii.strashko@xxxxxx> wrote:
> > The similar GPIO HW block is used by keystone SoCs as
> > in Davinci SoCs.
> > Hence, reuse Davinci GPIO driver for Keystone taking into
> > account that Keystone contains ARM GIC IRQ controller which
> > is implemented using IRQ Chip.
> >
> > Documentation:
> >          http://www.ti.com/lit/ug/sprugv1/sprugv1.pdf
> >
> > CC: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > CC: Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@xxxxxx>
> > CC: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@xxxxxx>
> > CC: devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@xxxxxx>
> > ---
> >   .../devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio-davinci.txt      |    4 +-
> >   drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c                        |   49 +++++++++++++++-----
> >   2 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio-davinci.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio-davinci.txt
> > index a2e839d..4ce9862 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio-davinci.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio-davinci.txt
> > @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
> > -Davinci GPIO controller bindings
> > +Davinci/Keystone GPIO controller bindings
> >
> >   Required Properties:
> > -- compatible: should be "ti,dm6441-gpio"
> > +- compatible: should be "ti,dm6441-gpio", "ti,keystone-gpio"
> >
> >   - reg: Physical base address of the controller and the size of memory mapped
> >          registers.
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c
> > index 73f65ca..3e44e0c 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c
> > @@ -413,6 +413,27 @@ static const struct irq_domain_ops davinci_gpio_irq_ops = {
> >          .xlate = irq_domain_xlate_onetwocell,
> >   };
> >
> > +static struct irq_chip *davinci_gpio_get_irq_chip(unsigned int irq)
> > +{
> > +       static struct irq_chip_type gpio_unbanked;
> > +
> > +       gpio_unbanked = *container_of(irq_get_chip(irq),
> > +                                     struct irq_chip_type, chip);
> > +
> > +       return &gpio_unbanked.chip;
> > +};
> > +
> > +static struct irq_chip *keystone_gpio_get_irq_chip(unsigned int irq)
> > +{
> > +       static struct irq_chip gpio_unbanked;
> > +
> > +       gpio_unbanked = *irq_get_chip(irq);
> > +       pr_err("keystone_gpio_get_irq_chip\n");
>
> Do you intend this pr_err() to remain here?

No, thanks - will remove.

> > +       return &gpio_unbanked;
> > +};
> > +
> > +static const struct of_device_id davinci_gpio_ids[];
> > +
> >   /*
> >    * NOTE:  for suspend/resume, probably best to make a platform_device with
> >    * suspend_late/resume_resume calls hooking into results of the set_wake()
> > @@ -433,6 +454,15 @@ static int davinci_gpio_irq_setup(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >          struct davinci_gpio_platform_data *pdata = dev->platform_data;
> >          struct davinci_gpio_regs __iomem *g;
> >          struct irq_domain       *irq_domain = NULL;
> > +       const struct of_device_id *match;
> > +       struct irq_chip *irq_chip;
> > +       struct irq_chip *(*gpio_get_irq_chip)(unsigned int irq);
> > +
> > +       gpio_get_irq_chip = davinci_gpio_get_irq_chip;
> > +       match = of_match_device(of_match_ptr(davinci_gpio_ids),
> > +                               dev);
> > +       if (match)
> > +               gpio_get_irq_chip = match->data;
> >
> >          ngpio = pdata->ngpio;
> >          res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_IRQ, 0);
> > @@ -442,7 +472,6 @@ static int davinci_gpio_irq_setup(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >          }
> >
> >          bank_irq = res->start;
> > -
> >          if (!bank_irq) {
> >                  dev_err(dev, "Invalid IRQ resource\n");
> >                  return -ENODEV;
> > @@ -484,25 +513,22 @@ static int davinci_gpio_irq_setup(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >          }
> >
> >          /*
> > -        * AINTC can handle direct/unbanked IRQs for GPIOs, with the GPIO
> > +        * INTC can handle direct/unbanked IRQs for GPIOs, with the GPIO
> >           * controller only handling trigger modes.  We currently assume no
> >           * IRQ mux conflicts; gpio_irq_type_unbanked() is only for GPIOs.
> >           */
> >          if (pdata->gpio_unbanked) {
> > -               static struct irq_chip_type gpio_unbanked;
> > -
> >                  /* pass "bank 0" GPIO IRQs to AINTC */
> >                  chips[0].chip.to_irq = gpio_to_irq_unbanked;
> >                  chips[0].gpio_irq = bank_irq;
> >                  chips[0].gpio_unbanked = pdata->gpio_unbanked;
> >                  binten = BIT(0);
> >
> > -               /* AINTC handles mask/unmask; GPIO handles triggering */
> > +               /* INTC handles mask/unmask; GPIO handles triggering */
> >                  irq = bank_irq;
> > -               gpio_unbanked = *container_of(irq_get_chip(irq),
> > -                                             struct irq_chip_type, chip);
> > -               gpio_unbanked.chip.name = "GPIO-AINTC";
> > -               gpio_unbanked.chip.irq_set_type = gpio_irq_type_unbanked;
> > +               irq_chip = gpio_get_irq_chip(irq);
> > +               irq_chip->name = "GPIO-AINTC";
>
> According to the other renamings I see in this file, shouldn't the
> string also be changed to "GPIO-INTC"?

Right. Will change, it should be more generic now.

I'll wait a bit for other comments and resend.

Regards,
-grygorii


--
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/