Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: qcom: spmi-gpio: correct parent irqspec translation

[skakit]

Hi Linus,

On 2021-08-13 14:27, Linus Walleij wrote:
> Hi Satya/David,
>
> nice work on identifying this bug!
>
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 6:56 AM satya priya <skakit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
> wrote:
> > From: David Collins <collinsd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > pmic_gpio_child_to_parent_hwirq() and
> > gpiochip_populate_parent_fwspec_fourcell() translate a pinctrl-
> > spmi-gpio irqspec to an SPMI controller irqspec.  When they do
> > this, they use a fixed SPMI slave ID of 0 and a fixed GPIO
> > peripheral offset of 0xC0 (corresponding to SPMI address 0xC000).
> > This translation results in an incorrect irqspec for secondary
> > PMICs that don't have a slave ID of 0 as well as for PMIC chips
> > which have GPIO peripherals located at a base address other than
> > 0xC000.
> >
> > Correct this issue by passing the slave ID of the pinctrl-spmi-
> > gpio device's parent in the SPMI controller irqspec and by
> > calculating the peripheral ID base from the device tree 'reg'
> > property of the pinctrl-spmi-gpio device.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: David Collins <collinsd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: satya priya <skakit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Is this a regression or is it fine if I just apply it for v5.15?
> I was thinking v5.15 since it isn't yet used in device trees.

Without this fix, [2/2] Vol+ support is failing. If possible please 
merge it on current branch.

> Yours,
> Linus Walleij