Hello Tony,
On 10/12/2015 11:46 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinch...@ideasonboard.com> [151012 14:17]:
>> Hello,
>>
>> While working on regulators, GPIOs and DT I noticed that many of our DT
>> source
>> files incorrectly describe fixed regulators. The common error patterns are
>>
>> - Usage of the undefined (and never parsed) enable-active-low property
>> - Usage of the enable-active-high property without specifying an enable GPIO
>> - Typos in the enabl GPIO property name (gpios instead of gpio)
>> - Mismatch between the enable-active-high property (or the lack thereof) and
>> the enable GPIO flags
>>
>> This patch series fixes those issues in all the DT sources after locating the
>> errors using the following script.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> #!/bin/sh
>>
>> echo $1
>> cat $1 | awk '
>> BEGIN {
>> open_drain = 0;
>> active_high = 0;
>> gpio = 0;
>> flags = 0;
>> }
>>
>> match($0, /([a-zA-Z0-9@_-]*) {/, ary) {
>> name = ary[1];
>> }
>>
>> /compatible.*"regulator-fixed"/ {
>> found = 1;
>> }
>>
>> /enable-active-high/ {
>> active_high = 1;
>> }
>>
>> /gpio-open-drain/ {
>> open_drain = 1;
>> }
>>
>> match($0, /gpio += <.* ([^ ]*)>/, ary) {
>> gpio = 1;
>> flags = ary[1];
>> if (flags == 0)
>> flags = "GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH";
>> }
>>
>> /}/ {
>> if (found) {
>> if (gpio) {
>> print "\t" name ": active high " active_high " " flags
>> " open drain " open_drain;
>> if ((active_high && flags == "GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW") ||
>> (!active_high && flags == "GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH"))
>> print "WARNING: enable-active-high and flags do
>> not match"
>> } else {
>> if (active_high)
>> print "WARNING: active high without GPIO"
>> if (open_drain)
>> print "WARNING: open drain without GPIO"
>> }
>> }
>>
>> gpio = 0;
>> found = 0;
>> active_high = 0;
>> open_drain = 0;
>> flags = 0;
>> }
>> '
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> All patches except for the ones touching omap3-beagle-xm and omap3-overo-base
>> are untested as I lack test hardware.
>>
>> As there's no dependency between the patches touching different source files
>> the appropriate maintainers could take their share of the patches in their
>> tree. Alternatively I could send a single pull request after collecting all
>> acks but that might be more complex.
>
> Nice clean-up. For omaps, there's an earlier patch posted by
> Javier Martinez Canillas <jav...@osg.samsung.com> as "[PATCH] ARM: dts: Use
> defined GPIO constants in flags cell for OMAP2+ boards". Can you guys do some
> cross checking and let me know which combination I should appluy for omaps?
>
Since Laurent's changes for OMAP are part of a bigger series and my patch
was only for OMAP, probably makes sense for you to pick his patches and I
can re-spin mine on top of that.
BTW, I posted as a single patch since the changes were trivial but maybe
that made handling these conflicts harder and I should split the changes
instead, since I'll resend anyways.
What do you prefer? a patch per SoC family (i.e: OMAP{2,3,4,5}) or patch
per board DTS?
> Regards,
>
> Tony
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc"
> in
> the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
Best regards,
--
Javier Martinez Canillas
Open Source Group
Samsung Research America
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
