I understand, but i don't think there is a reason for using unsigned-----Original Message-----Yes, u32 seems more clear here, but I notice all other place use unsigned long, so I keep the same code style.
From: Stefan Wahren <wahrenst@xxxxxxx>
Sent: 2024年7月22日 18:32
To: Bough Chen <haibo.chen@xxxxxxx>; linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx;
brgl@xxxxxxxx
Cc: linux-gpio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
imx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio: vf610: add get_direction() support
Hi Haibo,
Am 22.07.24 um 08:28 schrieb haibo.chen@xxxxxxx:
From: Haibo Chen <haibo.chen@xxxxxxx>gpio_chip *chip, unsigned gpio,
For IP which do not contain PDDR, currently use the pinmux API
pinctrl_gpio_direction_input() to config the output/input, pinmux
currently do not support get_direction(). So here add the GPIO
get_direction() support only for the IP which has Port Data Direction
Register (PDDR).
Signed-off-by: Haibo Chen <haibo.chen@xxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpio/gpio-vf610.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 19 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-vf610.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-vf610.c
index 07e5e6323e86..08ca8377b19c 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-vf610.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-vf610.c
@@ -151,6 +151,19 @@ static int vf610_gpio_direction_output(struct
return pinctrl_gpio_direction_output(chip, gpio);thanks for sending this patch. I'm fine with this patch, but could we use u32 to
}
+static int vf610_gpio_get_direction(struct gpio_chip *gc, unsigned
+int gpio) {
+ struct vf610_gpio_port *port = gpiochip_get_data(gc);
+ unsigned long mask = BIT(gpio);
make it clear about the range of the mask?
I go through the history of this driver, seems no specific explanation about the unsigned long.