[PATCH 54/61] gpio: ucb1400: Use devm_gpiochip_add_data() for gpio registration

Use devm_gpiochip_add_data() for GPIO registration. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan --- drivers/gpio/gpio-ucb1400.c | 3 +-- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-ucb1400.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-ucb1400.c index 2c5cd46..5dbe31b 100644 --- a/drivers/gpio

[PATCH] gpio-ucb1400: Delete an unnecessary variable initialisation in ucb1400_gpio_probe()

From: Markus Elfring Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2015 19:36:20 +0100 The variable "err" will eventually be set to an appropriate value from a call of the gpiochip_add() function. Thus let us omit the explicit initialisation at the beginning. Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring --- drivers/gpio/gpio

Re: [PATCH] gpio: gpio-ucb1400.c: Cleaning up null pointer checks that could never happen

On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Rickard Strandqvist wrote: > Removal of null pointer checks that could never happen > > This was found using a static code analysis program called cppcheck > > Signed-off-by: Rickard Strandqvist Correct, patch applied. Yours, Linus Walleij -- To unsubscribe fro

[PATCH] gpio: gpio-ucb1400.c: Cleaning up null pointer checks that could never happen

Removal of null pointer checks that could never happen This was found using a static code analysis program called cppcheck Signed-off-by: Rickard Strandqvist --- drivers/gpio/gpio-ucb1400.c |2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-ucb1400.c b

Re: [PATCH] gpio: ucb1400: Can be built as a module

On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 6:34 PM, Jean Delvare wrote: > With the recent code cleanup from Marek Vasut, driver gpio-ucb1400 can > be built as a module, so change symbol GPIO_UCB1400 from bool to > tristate. > > Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare > Cc: Marek Vasut > Cc: Grant Likely

Re: [PATCH] gpio: ucb1400: Can be built as a module

Dear Jean Delvare, > With the recent code cleanup from Marek Vasut, driver gpio-ucb1400 can > be built as a module, so change symbol GPIO_UCB1400 from bool to > tristate. > > Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare > Cc: Marek Vasut > Cc: Grant Likely > Cc: Linus Walleij

[PATCH] gpio: ucb1400: Can be built as a module

With the recent code cleanup from Marek Vasut, driver gpio-ucb1400 can be built as a module, so change symbol GPIO_UCB1400 from bool to tristate. Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare Cc: Marek Vasut Cc: Grant Likely Cc: Linus Walleij --- drivers/gpio/Kconfig |2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion

Re: gpio-ucb1400

On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Jean Delvare wrote: > Well Marek proposed a cleanup which looked good [1], several times > apparently, but it was never applied. > > [1] > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2010-October/028656.html Marek, could you rebase and repost this and s

Re: gpio-ucb1400

On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 09:22:37AM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > Le lundi 01 avril 2013 à 16:32 +0100, Mark Brown a écrit : > > What the driver is doing is, unfortunately, the best practice for an > > AC'97 connected device like this - we've got an uncomfortable mix of > > an enumerable bus and pla

Re: gpio-ucb1400

Le lundi 01 avril 2013 à 16:32 +0100, Mark Brown a écrit : > On Mon, Apr 01, 2013 at 01:06:43PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > > > My point was, the upstream gpio-ucb1400 driver in its current form is > > unusable (on top of being ugly.) I have no doubt that someone us

Re: gpio-ucb1400

On Mon, Apr 01, 2013 at 01:06:43PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > My point was, the upstream gpio-ucb1400 driver in its current form is > unusable (on top of being ugly.) I have no doubt that someone used that > driver successfully in some external kernel tree, but the code that was

Re: gpio-ucb1400

Le dimanche 31 mars 2013 à 19:19 +0200, Marek Vasut a écrit : > Dear Guenter Roeck, > > Jean is absolutely right - it should get fixed, or the driver should be > > dropped if no one is using it anyway. > > I think ARM/palmtc was using this. My point was, the upstream gpio-

Re: gpio-ucb1400

Dear Guenter Roeck, > On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 08:20:44PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote: > > Dear Guenter Roeck, > > > > > On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 08:46:39PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > In September 2009, a driver for the GPIO function of the UCB1400 chip > > > > was add

Re: gpio-ucb1400

On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 08:20:44PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote: > Dear Guenter Roeck, > > > On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 08:46:39PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > In September 2009, a driver for the GPIO function of the UCB1400 chip > > > was added to the kernel tree. The probe func

Re: gpio-ucb1400

Dear Guenter Roeck, > On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 08:46:39PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > In September 2009, a driver for the GPIO function of the UCB1400 chip > > was added to the kernel tree. The probe function of this driver requires > > ucbdata to be set. The only place where th

Re: gpio-ucb1400

On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 08:46:39PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote: > Hi all, > > In September 2009, a driver for the GPIO function of the UCB1400 chip > was added to the kernel tree. The probe function of this driver requires > ucbdata to be set. The only place where this happens is in function > ucb14

gpio-ucb1400

Hi all, In September 2009, a driver for the GPIO function of the UCB1400 chip was added to the kernel tree. The probe function of this driver requires ucbdata to be set. The only place where this happens is in function ucb1400_gpio_set_data(). This function was never call, and still isn't. So this

[PATCH RFC 15/15 v5] gpio-ucb1400: Add block GPIO API

This patch adds block GPIO API support to the gpio-ucb1400 driver. Signed-off-by: Roland Stigge --- drivers/gpio/gpio-ucb1400.c | 23 +++ 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+) --- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/gpio/gpio-ucb1400.c +++ linux-2.6/drivers/gpio/gpio-ucb1400.c @@ -45,6