Am 24.07.2018 um 10:37 schrieb Michal Simek:
On 23.7.2018 20:29, Stefan Herbrechtsmeier wrote:
Am 23.07.2018 um 11:08 schrieb Michal Simek:
On 20.7.2018 21:31, Stefan Herbrechtsmeier wrote:
Am 12.07.2018 um 16:04 schrieb Michal Simek:
There should be proper bank name setup to distiguish between different
gpio drivers. Use dev->name for it.
Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.si...@xilinx.com>
---
drivers/gpio/zynq_gpio.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/zynq_gpio.c b/drivers/gpio/zynq_gpio.c
index 26f69b1a713f..f793ee5754a8 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/zynq_gpio.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/zynq_gpio.c
@@ -337,6 +337,8 @@ static int zynq_gpio_probe(struct udevice *dev)
struct zynq_gpio_privdata *priv = dev_get_priv(dev);
struct gpio_dev_priv *uc_priv = dev_get_uclass_priv(dev);
+ uc_priv->bank_name = dev->name;
+
if (priv->p_data)
uc_priv->gpio_count = priv->p_data->ngpio;
Does this not lead to ugly names because the gpio number is append to
the bank_name? Have you check the "gpio status -a" output?
Yes I was checking it. Names are composed together but also just numbers
works as before.
gpio@ff0a00000: input: 0 [ ]
gpio@ff0a00001: input: 0 [ ]
gpio@ff0a00002: input: 0 [ ]
gpio@ff0a00003: input: 0 [ ]
gpio@ff0a00004: input: 0 [ ]
gpio@ff0a00005: input: 0 [ ]
gpio@ff0a00006: input: 0 [ ]
gpio@ff0a00007: input: 0 [ ]
gpio@ff0a00008: input: 0 [ ]
gpio@ff0a00009: input: 0 [ ]
Do you think that this are meaningful names? It isn't possible to
separate the device and pin number as well as it mix hex and decimal
numbers.
If you know better way how to setup a bank name please let me know but I
need to distinguish ps gpio from pl one and for pl we need to know the
address.
I know the use case.
A lot of drivers use the bank_name from the device tree, some drivers
append an underscore to the bank name and others add the req_seq of the
device to an alphabetic character.
Other drivers use the gpio-bank-name from the device tree.
I can't see this property inside Linux kernel. If this has been reviewed
by dt guys please let me know.
This property is only used by u-boot. I think it isn't needed by the
Linux kernel.
I am happy to use consistent solution but what's that?
Consistent solution between what?
Mixing name with hex and int is not nice but adding "_" or something
else is just a pain in driver code. If this is done in core I am fine
with that but adding this code to all drivers don't look like generic
solution at all.
Normally the bank name is an alphabetic character or string. Maybe we
could add the device name to the gpio_lookup_name function and add an
additional optional device name parameter to the gpio command.
Using additional u-boot property is not good too.
I have mentioned in "gpio: xilinx: Convert driver to DM"
(sha1:10441ec9224d0d269dc512819a32c0785a6338d3)
that uc-priv->name is completely unused. Maybe this should be dev->name
and bank_name should be really used for banks.
Isn't the uc-priv->name used for the label of the request?
Then in gpio status -a can be
Device gpio@a0001000:
Bank:
...
but not sure how gpio commands will work to address exact pin from
prompt. Because this is normally working
gpio toggle gpio@a00010001
With an optional device name this would be:
gpio toggle gpio@a0001000 1
Alternative the gpio command could support the requested labels:
gpio toggle second-gpio
Best regards
Stefan
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
