Re: [PATCH] gpio: Document the 'valid_mask' being internal

[Matti Vaittinen]

CC: Geert (because, I think he was asked about the Rcar GPIO check before).

On 28/02/2025 10:23, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 9:24 AM Matti Vaittinen
> <mazziesaccount@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> I did some quick testing. I used:
> (...)
> > which left GPIO0 ... GPIO6 masked (pins used for ADC) and only GPIO7
> > unmasked.
> >
> > Then I added:
> > gpiotst {
> >          compatible = "rohm,foo-bd72720-gpio";
> >          rohm,dvs-vsel-gpios = <&adc 5 0>, <&adc 6 0>;
> > };
> >
> > and a dummy driver which does:
> > gpio_array = devm_gpiod_get_array(&pdev->dev, "rohm,dvs-vsel",
> >                                    GPIOD_OUT_LOW);
> >
> > ...
> >
> > ret = gpiod_set_array_value_cansleep(gpio_array->ndescs,
> >                  gpio_array->desc, gpio_array->info, values);
> >
> > As a result the bd79124 gpio driver got it's set_multiple called with
> > masked pins. (Oh, and I had accidentally prepared to handle this as I
> > had added a sanity check for pinmux register in the set_multiple()).
>
> But... how did you mask of the pins 0..5 in valid_mask in this
> example?
>
> If this is device tree, I would expect that at least you set up
> gpio-reserved-ranges = <0 5>; which will initialize the valid_mask.
>
> You still need to tell the gpiolib that they are taken for other
> purposes somehow.
>
> I think devm_gpiod_get_array() should have failed in that case.
>
> The call graph should look like this:
>
> devm_gpiod_get_array()
>      gpiod_get_array()
>          gpiod_get_index(0...n)
>              gpiod_find_and_request()
>                  gpiod_request()
>                      gpiod_request_commit()

Here in my setup the guard.gc->request == NULL. Thus the code never goes 
to the branch with the validation. And just before you ask me why the 
guard.gc->request is NULL - what do you call a blind bambi? :)
 - No idea.

>                          gpiochip_line_is_valid()

Eg, This is never called.

Yours,
	-- Matti