Re: Question: pinctrl-backed GPIO set_config and gpio_chip::can_sleep

[Runyu Xiao]

Hi,

Thanks for checking this.

I agree that marking these memory-mapped controllers as can_sleep is too
broad if the only sleepable part is the pinctrl range lookup.  That would
make consumers treat otherwise MMIO-backed get/set paths as sleepable,
which is not the contract I want to change.

I will hold back the at91-pio4/stm32/sunxi can_sleep series and look at
the pinctrl core direction instead, specifically whether
pinctrldev_list_mutex can be replaced by a non-sleeping lock for
pinctrl_get_device_gpio_range().  That should also line up with the GPIO
direction callback case discussed in the other thread.

Thanks,
Runyu