Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] gpio: Add gpio latch driver

From: Andy Shevchenko
Date: Wed Aug 31 2022 - 16:51:32 EST


On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 9:02 AM Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> This driver implements a GPIO multiplexer based on latches connected to
> other GPIOs. A set of data GPIOs is connected to the data input of
> multiple latches. The clock input of each latch is driven by another
> set of GPIOs. With two 8-bit latches 10 GPIOs can be multiplexed into
> 16 GPIOs. GPOs might be a better term as in fact the multiplexed pins
> are output only.

I'm still unsure it shouldn't be a part of the (not yet in upstream)
driver that I have mentioned before. But let's leave this apart right
now.

...

> +#include <linux/err.h>
> +#include <linux/module.h>

> +#include <linux/of_device.h>

Why?
It seems you misplaced it instead of mod_devicetable.h.

> +#include <linux/gpio/driver.h>
> +#include <linux/platform_device.h>
> +#include <linux/gpio/consumer.h>

Keep above sorted?

...

> + struct mutex mutex;
> + spinlock_t spinlock;

Checkpatch usually complains if locks are not commented. Looking at
the below code, why it's not an (anonymous) union?

...

> + if (val)
> + priv->shadow[latch] |= BIT(offset % priv->n_pins);
> + else
> + priv->shadow[latch] &= ~BIT(offset % priv->n_pins);

I believe shadow should be defined as unsigned long * and hence normal
bit operations can be applied. For example here is assign_bit().

...

> + priv->shadow = devm_kcalloc(&pdev->dev, priv->n_ports, sizeof(*priv->shadow),
> + GFP_KERNEL);

bitmap_zalloc()

> + if (!priv->shadow)
> + return -ENOMEM;

...

> + priv->gc.parent = &pdev->dev;

> + priv->gc.of_node = pdev->dev.of_node;

Redundant as repeating parent above.

...

> +static const struct of_device_id gpio_latch_ids[] = {
> + {
> + .compatible = "gpio-latch",
> + }, {
> + /* sentinel */
> + }

You may compress this to the 2 LoCs.

> +};

--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko