On 24.07.2012 16:08, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Tuesday 24 July 2012, Daniel Mack wrote:
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c >>>>> index d18068a..51bc232 100644 >>>>> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c >>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c >>>>> @@ -147,13 +147,13 @@ int of_gpio_simple_xlate(struct gpio_chip *gc, >>>>> if (WARN_ON(gpiospec->args_count < gc->of_gpio_n_cells)) >>>>> return -EINVAL; >>>>> >>>>> - if (gpiospec->args[0] >= gc->ngpio) >>>>> + if (gpiospec->args[0] >= gc->ngpio + gc->base) >>>>> return -EINVAL; >>>>> >>>>> if (flags) >>>>> *flags = gpiospec->args[1]; >>>>> >>>>> - return gpiospec->args[0]; >>>>> + return gpiospec->args[0] - gc->base; >>>>> } >>>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(of_gpio_simple_xlate); >>> >>> Where would that gc->base come from? >> >> It is set up when the chips are initialized. Let's put it that way: why >> would we have this ->base if it is practically unusable in devicetree >> environments? > > The base gets used to put the gpiochip into the Linux gpio number space, > which is not necessarily the same as the number space used in the device > tree. You can dynamically add other gpio controllers that would get > some arbitrary base assigned at runtime, so you cannot subtract that > base from the hardware number to get a local one in the common code. > > I fear you will have to provide your own xlate function for pxa if > you want to use this numbering. Something like this:? I did my own xlate function in the first place, but then I thought it could be made working in a more general way. But your explanation makes sense, so I will add something that is based on your sniplet. Thanks, Daniel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
