On Tue, 5 Jun 2018 01:09:32 +0200 Boris Brezillon <boris.brezil...@bootlin.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Jun 2018 18:48:08 +0200 > Janusz Krzysztofik <jmkrzy...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Monday, June 4, 2018 11:55:43 AM CEST Boris Brezillon wrote: > > > On Wed, 30 May 2018 22:39:03 +0200 > > > > > > Janusz Krzysztofik <jmkrzy...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, May 30, 2018 7:52:20 PM CEST Boris Brezillon wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 30 May 2018 19:43:09 +0200 > > > > > > > > > > Janusz Krzysztofik <jmkrzy...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Wednesday, May 30, 2018 11:05:00 AM CEST Boris Brezillon wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Janusz, > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Boris, > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, 26 May 2018 00:20:45 +0200 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Janusz Krzysztofik <jmkrzy...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > Changes since v1: > > > > > > > > - fix handling of devm_gpiod_get_optional() return values - > > > > > > > > thanks > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Andy Shevchenko. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can you put the changelog after the "---" separator so that it > > > > > > > does > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > appear in the final commit message? > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, sure, sorry for that. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +err_gpiod: > > > > > > > > + if (err == -ENODEV || err == -ENOENT) > > > > > > > > + err = -EPROBE_DEFER; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hm, isn't it better to make gpiod_find() return > > > > > > > ERR_PTR(-EPROBE_DEFER) > > > > > > > here [1]? At least, ENOENT should not be turned into EPROBE_DEFER, > > > > > > > because it's returned when there's no entry matching the requested > > > > > > > gpio > > > > > > > in the lookup table, and deferring the probe won't solve this > > > > > > > problem. > > > > > > > > > > > > ENOENT is also returned when no matching lookup table is found. That > > > > > > may > > > > > > happen if consumer dev_name stored in the table differs from > > > > > > dev_name > > > > > > assigned to the consumer by its bus, the platform bus in this case. > > > > > > For > > > > > > that reason I think the consumer dev_name should be initialized in > > > > > > the > > > > > > table after the device is registered, when its actual dev_name can > > > > > > be > > > > > > obtained. If that device registration happens after the driver is > > > > > > already > > > > > > registered, e.g., at late_initcall, the device is probed before its > > > > > > lookup table is ready. For that reason returning EPROBE_DEFER seems > > > > > > better to me even in the ENOENT case. > > > > > > > > > > Sorry, I don't get it. Aren't GPIO lookup tables supposed to be > > > > > declared > > > > > in board files, especially if the GPIO is used by a platform device? > > > > > When would you have a lookup table registered later in the init/boot > > > > > process? > > > > > > > > When e.g. I'd like to register my GPIO consumer platform device at > > > > late_initcall for some reason, and I'm not sure what exact dev_name my > > > > consomer will be registered with by the platform bus. > > > > > > You should know the name before the device is registered. > > > > What if I use PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO? Just had a quick look at board-ams-delta.c and you don't have a single device setting pdev->id to PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO. It's either set to PLATFORM_DEVID_NONE (-1) or assigned a specific id, so the problem does not exist, really. Just set the name .dev_id to the appropriate value at declaration time and register the lookup tables before registering the pdevs.
