Re: Re: Re: [RFC PATCH] i2c: at91: Fix pinmux after devm_gpiod_get() for bus recovery

2020-06-09 Thread Codrin.Ciubotariu
On 20.05.2020 19:27, Wolfram Sang wrote: > >>> This will do for 5.7. For 5.8 or 5.9, I can imagine to take the two >>> pinctrl_state pointers into bus_recovery_info and handle all this in the >>> core. I will try this later this week if noone is super-eager to try it >>> out before. >>> >> >> By

Re: Re: [RFC PATCH] i2c: at91: Fix pinmux after devm_gpiod_get() for bus recovery

2020-05-20 Thread Wolfram Sang
> > This will do for 5.7. For 5.8 or 5.9, I can imagine to take the two > > pinctrl_state pointers into bus_recovery_info and handle all this in the > > core. I will try this later this week if noone is super-eager to try it > > out before. > > > > By 'all this' you mean to move the entire

Re: Re: [RFC PATCH] i2c: at91: Fix pinmux after devm_gpiod_get() for bus recovery

2020-05-13 Thread Codrin.Ciubotariu
On 05.05.2020 18:12, Wolfram Sang wrote: > On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 10:06:43AM +0300, Codrin Ciubotariu wrote: >> devm_gpiod_get() usually calls gpio_request_enable() for non-strict pinmux >> drivers. These puts the pins in GPIO mode, whithout notifying the pinctrl >> driver. At this point, the I2C