Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 8 Sep 2011 20:54:55 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] leds/of: leds-gpio.c: Use gpio_get_value_cansleep() when initializing. | From | Trent Piepho <> |
| |
The non-cansleep version is only supposed to be different from __gpio_get_value() (which is virtually the same code) in that it can inline a fast gpio operation. So calling cansleep vs the non-cansleep shouldn't result in any change that would break anything. If it did it would be flaw in that architecture's version of gpio_get_value(). It should just mean a call that could be inlined won't be.
I suppose one could ask if gpio_get_value_cansleep() needs to exist.
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 6:35 PM, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > > On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 16:39:52 -0700 David Daney <david.daney@cavium.com> wrote: > > > I get the following warning: > > > > ------------[ cut here ]------------ > > WARNING: at drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c:1559 __gpio_get_value+0x90/0x98() > > Modules linked in: > > Call Trace: > > [<ffffffff81440950>] dump_stack+0x8/0x34 > > [<ffffffff81141478>] warn_slowpath_common+0x78/0xa0 > > [<ffffffff812f0958>] __gpio_get_value+0x90/0x98 > > [<ffffffff81434f04>] create_gpio_led+0xdc/0x194 > > [<ffffffff8143524c>] gpio_led_probe+0x290/0x36c > > [<ffffffff8130e8b0>] driver_probe_device+0x78/0x1b0 > > [<ffffffff8130eaa8>] __driver_attach+0xc0/0xc8 > > [<ffffffff8130d7ac>] bus_for_each_dev+0x64/0xb0 > > [<ffffffff8130e130>] bus_add_driver+0x1c8/0x2a8 > > [<ffffffff8130f100>] driver_register+0x90/0x180 > > [<ffffffff81100438>] do_one_initcall+0x38/0x160 > > > > ---[ end trace ee38723fbefcd65c ]--- > > > > My GPIOs are on an I2C port expander, so we must use the *_cansleep() > > variant of the GPIO functions. This is was not being done in > > create_gpio_led(). > > > > We can change gpio_get_value() to gpio_get_value_cansleep() because it > > is only called from the platform_driver probe function, which is a > > context where we can sleep. > > > > Only tested on my gpio_cansleep() system, but it seems safe for all > > systems. > > > > ... > > > > --- a/drivers/leds/leds-gpio.c > > +++ b/drivers/leds/leds-gpio.c > > @@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ static int __devinit create_gpio_led(const struct gpio_led *template, > > } > > led_dat->cdev.brightness_set = gpio_led_set; > > if (template->default_state == LEDS_GPIO_DEFSTATE_KEEP) > > - state = !!gpio_get_value(led_dat->gpio) ^ led_dat->active_low; > > + state = !!gpio_get_value_cansleep(led_dat->gpio) ^ led_dat->active_low; > > else > > state = (template->default_state == LEDS_GPIO_DEFSTATE_ON); > > led_dat->cdev.brightness = state ? LED_FULL : LED_OFF; > > gpio_get_value() is an architecture-specific function whereas > gpio_get_value_cansleep() is not. Hence all architectures will now be > forced to use the same code. Why is this OK? > > Asides: > > The duplication of code between __gpio_get_value() and > gpio_get_value_cansleep() is daft. > > The comment over gpio_get_value_cansleep() sucks mud rocks. > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |