On 09/17/14 17:03, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Igor,
>
> On 17 September 2014 07:00, Igor Grinberg <grinb...@compulab.co.il
> <mailto:grinb...@compulab.co.il>> wrote:
>
> On 09/17/14 06:51, Simon Glass wrote:
> > Add driver model support with this driver. In this case the platform
> data
> > is in the driver. It would be better to put this into an SOC-specific
> file,
> > but this is best attempted when more boards are moved over to use driver
> > model.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org
> <mailto:s...@chromium.org>>
> > ---
> >
> > Changes in v2:
> > - Change 'reserved' to 'requested'
> > - Add an internal function to check if a GPIO is requested
> > - Tidy up confusing code that creates names for gpio_request()
> >
> > drivers/gpio/mxc_gpio.c | 302
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > 1 file changed, 301 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/mxc_gpio.c b/drivers/gpio/mxc_gpio.c
> > index 6a572d5..9435d2f 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpio/mxc_gpio.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpio/mxc_gpio.c
>
> [...]
[...]
> > +static int mxc_gpio_free(struct udevice *dev, unsigned offset)
> > +{
> > + struct mxc_bank_info *bank = dev_get_priv(dev);
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + ret = check_requested(dev, offset, __func__);
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
>
> In case of not requested gpio,
> should we really print the error message and return -EPERM?
> Or may be adopt free() behavior and just return silently?
> Linux gpiolib gpio_free() uses WARN_ON(extra_checks) for
> "not requested" cases, so it shouts only in DEBUG cases.
>
>
> I'm not sure - I intend to push this up to the DM layer at some point.
> I feel that keeping track of GPIO requested/free should be a common
> feature of the uclass rather than implemented in each driver.
Agreed. I've got the same feeling while looking at this.
> But until we have enough drivers to make it clear that this is acceptable,
> I'm leaving it as it is.
>
> So for at least now I think this is correct. We might consider bringing
> in some sort of WARN system to U-Boot. The caller can ignore the return
> value anyway.
Ok.
--
Regards,
Igor.
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
