Re: [PATCH RESEND] backlight: pwm_bl: don't use GPIOF_* with gpiod_get_direction
On Tue, 24 Apr 2018, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 10:41 AM, Simon Horman wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 10:12:57AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > >> On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, Simon Horman wrote: > >> > On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 02:32:40PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > >> > > The documentation was wrong, gpiod_get_direction() returns 0/1 instead > >> > > of the GPIOF_* flags. The docs were fixed with commit 94fc73094abe47 > >> > > ("gpio: correct docs about return value of gpiod_get_direction"). Now, > >> > > fix this user (until a better, system-wide solution is in place). > >> > > > >> > > Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang > >> > > Acked-by: Daniel Thompson > >> > > >> > Reviewed-by: Simon Horman > >> > >> Thanks for the Reviewed-by Simon. I have applied it to the original mail. > >> > >> Do you know why you mail wasn't sent attached to the original thread? > >> For some reason I received this mail on it's own i.e. not in reply > >> to the original. > > > > No, not off hand. Perhaps I responded to the email in some unusual way > > but by now I don't recall. In any case I'll try to be more careful > > in future. > > I see Lee is using gmail for sending, so I assume also for receiving. Well I'm using their servers, but my set-up is IMAP/Mutt. > While I did receive Simon's reply in-thread, lately I had issues with gmail > not always doing so, and sometimes failing to do deduplication when receiving > email through multiple paths (mailing lists and/or directly). -- Lee Jones [李琼斯] Linaro Services Technical Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
Re: [PATCH RESEND] backlight: pwm_bl: don't use GPIOF_* with gpiod_get_direction
On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 10:41 AM, Simon Horman wrote: > On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 10:12:57AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: >> On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, Simon Horman wrote: >> > On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 02:32:40PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: >> > > The documentation was wrong, gpiod_get_direction() returns 0/1 instead >> > > of the GPIOF_* flags. The docs were fixed with commit 94fc73094abe47 >> > > ("gpio: correct docs about return value of gpiod_get_direction"). Now, >> > > fix this user (until a better, system-wide solution is in place). >> > > >> > > Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang >> > > Acked-by: Daniel Thompson >> > >> > Reviewed-by: Simon Horman >> >> Thanks for the Reviewed-by Simon. I have applied it to the original mail. >> >> Do you know why you mail wasn't sent attached to the original thread? >> For some reason I received this mail on it's own i.e. not in reply >> to the original. > > No, not off hand. Perhaps I responded to the email in some unusual way > but by now I don't recall. In any case I'll try to be more careful > in future. I see Lee is using gmail for sending, so I assume also for receiving. While I did receive Simon's reply in-thread, lately I had issues with gmail not always doing so, and sometimes failing to do deduplication when receiving email through multiple paths (mailing lists and/or directly). Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- ge...@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds
Re: [PATCH RESEND] backlight: pwm_bl: don't use GPIOF_* with gpiod_get_direction
On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 10:12:57AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, Simon Horman wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 02:32:40PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > The documentation was wrong, gpiod_get_direction() returns 0/1 instead > > > of the GPIOF_* flags. The docs were fixed with commit 94fc73094abe47 > > > ("gpio: correct docs about return value of gpiod_get_direction"). Now, > > > fix this user (until a better, system-wide solution is in place). > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang > > > Acked-by: Daniel Thompson > > > > Reviewed-by: Simon Horman > > Thanks for the Reviewed-by Simon. I have applied it to the original mail. > > Do you know why you mail wasn't sent attached to the original thread? > For some reason I received this mail on it's own i.e. not in reply > to the original. No, not off hand. Perhaps I responded to the email in some unusual way but by now I don't recall. In any case I'll try to be more careful in future.
Re: [PATCH RESEND] backlight: pwm_bl: don't use GPIOF_* with gpiod_get_direction
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, Simon Horman wrote: > On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 02:32:40PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > The documentation was wrong, gpiod_get_direction() returns 0/1 instead > > of the GPIOF_* flags. The docs were fixed with commit 94fc73094abe47 > > ("gpio: correct docs about return value of gpiod_get_direction"). Now, > > fix this user (until a better, system-wide solution is in place). > > > > Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang > > Acked-by: Daniel Thompson > > Reviewed-by: Simon Horman Thanks for the Reviewed-by Simon. I have applied it to the original mail. Do you know why you mail wasn't sent attached to the original thread? For some reason I received this mail on it's own i.e. not in reply to the original. > > --- > > > > Changes since V1: > > * rebased to top-of-linus-tree > > * added tag from Daniel, thanks! > > > > Through which tree does this need to go? > > > > drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c | 6 +++--- > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c > > b/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c > > index 1c2289ddd555..0fa7d2bd0e48 100644 > > --- a/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c > > +++ b/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c > > @@ -301,14 +301,14 @@ static int pwm_backlight_probe(struct platform_device > > *pdev) > > > > /* > > * If the GPIO is not known to be already configured as output, that > > -* is, if gpiod_get_direction returns either GPIOF_DIR_IN or -EINVAL, > > -* change the direction to output and set the GPIO as active. > > +* is, if gpiod_get_direction returns either 1 or -EINVAL, change the > > +* direction to output and set the GPIO as active. > > * Do not force the GPIO to active when it was already output as it > > * could cause backlight flickering or we would enable the backlight too > > * early. Leave the decision of the initial backlight state for later. > > */ > > if (pb->enable_gpio && > > - gpiod_get_direction(pb->enable_gpio) != GPIOF_DIR_OUT) > > + gpiod_get_direction(pb->enable_gpio) != 0) > > gpiod_direction_output(pb->enable_gpio, 1); > > > > pb->power_supply = devm_regulator_get(&pdev->dev, "power"); -- Lee Jones [李琼斯] Linaro Services Technical Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
Re: [PATCH RESEND] backlight: pwm_bl: don't use GPIOF_* with gpiod_get_direction
On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 06:08:24PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 09:32:16AM +0200, Simon Horman wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 02:32:40PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > The documentation was wrong, gpiod_get_direction() returns 0/1 instead > > > of the GPIOF_* flags. The docs were fixed with commit 94fc73094abe47 > > > ("gpio: correct docs about return value of gpiod_get_direction"). Now, > > > fix this user (until a better, system-wide solution is in place). > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang > > > Acked-by: Daniel Thompson > > > > Reviewed-by: Simon Horman > > > > > --- > > > > > > Changes since V1: > > > * rebased to top-of-linus-tree > > > * added tag from Daniel, thanks! > > > > > > Through which tree does this need to go? > > I think Daniel Thompson has one ... Sorry, I didn't spot the question at the bottom of the change block. For backlight patches generally go though Lee Jones' tree. Daniel.
Re: [PATCH RESEND] backlight: pwm_bl: don't use GPIOF_* with gpiod_get_direction
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 09:32:16AM +0200, Simon Horman wrote: > On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 02:32:40PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > The documentation was wrong, gpiod_get_direction() returns 0/1 instead > > of the GPIOF_* flags. The docs were fixed with commit 94fc73094abe47 > > ("gpio: correct docs about return value of gpiod_get_direction"). Now, > > fix this user (until a better, system-wide solution is in place). > > > > Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang > > Acked-by: Daniel Thompson > > Reviewed-by: Simon Horman > > > --- > > > > Changes since V1: > > * rebased to top-of-linus-tree > > * added tag from Daniel, thanks! > > > > Through which tree does this need to go? I think Daniel Thompson has one ... -Daniel > > > > drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c | 6 +++--- > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c > > b/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c > > index 1c2289ddd555..0fa7d2bd0e48 100644 > > --- a/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c > > +++ b/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c > > @@ -301,14 +301,14 @@ static int pwm_backlight_probe(struct platform_device > > *pdev) > > > > /* > > * If the GPIO is not known to be already configured as output, that > > -* is, if gpiod_get_direction returns either GPIOF_DIR_IN or -EINVAL, > > -* change the direction to output and set the GPIO as active. > > +* is, if gpiod_get_direction returns either 1 or -EINVAL, change the > > +* direction to output and set the GPIO as active. > > * Do not force the GPIO to active when it was already output as it > > * could cause backlight flickering or we would enable the backlight too > > * early. Leave the decision of the initial backlight state for later. > > */ > > if (pb->enable_gpio && > > - gpiod_get_direction(pb->enable_gpio) != GPIOF_DIR_OUT) > > + gpiod_get_direction(pb->enable_gpio) != 0) > > gpiod_direction_output(pb->enable_gpio, 1); > > > > pb->power_supply = devm_regulator_get(&pdev->dev, "power"); > > -- > > 2.11.0 > > > ___ > dri-devel mailing list > dri-de...@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch
Re: [PATCH RESEND] backlight: pwm_bl: don't use GPIOF_* with gpiod_get_direction
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 02:32:40PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > The documentation was wrong, gpiod_get_direction() returns 0/1 instead > of the GPIOF_* flags. The docs were fixed with commit 94fc73094abe47 > ("gpio: correct docs about return value of gpiod_get_direction"). Now, > fix this user (until a better, system-wide solution is in place). > > Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang > Acked-by: Daniel Thompson Reviewed-by: Simon Horman > --- > > Changes since V1: > * rebased to top-of-linus-tree > * added tag from Daniel, thanks! > > Through which tree does this need to go? > > drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c | 6 +++--- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c > b/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c > index 1c2289ddd555..0fa7d2bd0e48 100644 > --- a/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c > +++ b/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c > @@ -301,14 +301,14 @@ static int pwm_backlight_probe(struct platform_device > *pdev) > > /* >* If the GPIO is not known to be already configured as output, that > - * is, if gpiod_get_direction returns either GPIOF_DIR_IN or -EINVAL, > - * change the direction to output and set the GPIO as active. > + * is, if gpiod_get_direction returns either 1 or -EINVAL, change the > + * direction to output and set the GPIO as active. >* Do not force the GPIO to active when it was already output as it >* could cause backlight flickering or we would enable the backlight too >* early. Leave the decision of the initial backlight state for later. >*/ > if (pb->enable_gpio && > - gpiod_get_direction(pb->enable_gpio) != GPIOF_DIR_OUT) > + gpiod_get_direction(pb->enable_gpio) != 0) > gpiod_direction_output(pb->enable_gpio, 1); > > pb->power_supply = devm_regulator_get(&pdev->dev, "power"); > -- > 2.11.0 >
[PATCH RESEND] backlight: pwm_bl: don't use GPIOF_* with gpiod_get_direction
The documentation was wrong, gpiod_get_direction() returns 0/1 instead of the GPIOF_* flags. The docs were fixed with commit 94fc73094abe47 ("gpio: correct docs about return value of gpiod_get_direction"). Now, fix this user (until a better, system-wide solution is in place). Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang Acked-by: Daniel Thompson --- Changes since V1: * rebased to top-of-linus-tree * added tag from Daniel, thanks! Through which tree does this need to go? drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c b/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c index 1c2289ddd555..0fa7d2bd0e48 100644 --- a/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c +++ b/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c @@ -301,14 +301,14 @@ static int pwm_backlight_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) /* * If the GPIO is not known to be already configured as output, that -* is, if gpiod_get_direction returns either GPIOF_DIR_IN or -EINVAL, -* change the direction to output and set the GPIO as active. +* is, if gpiod_get_direction returns either 1 or -EINVAL, change the +* direction to output and set the GPIO as active. * Do not force the GPIO to active when it was already output as it * could cause backlight flickering or we would enable the backlight too * early. Leave the decision of the initial backlight state for later. */ if (pb->enable_gpio && - gpiod_get_direction(pb->enable_gpio) != GPIOF_DIR_OUT) + gpiod_get_direction(pb->enable_gpio) != 0) gpiod_direction_output(pb->enable_gpio, 1); pb->power_supply = devm_regulator_get(&pdev->dev, "power"); -- 2.11.0