lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Feb]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] pinctrl: make the pinmux-pins more helpful
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 06:56:09AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
>
> The debugfs file pinmux-pins used to tell which function was
> enabled but now states simply which device owns the pin. Being
> owned by the pinctrl driver itself means just that it's hogged
> so be a bit more helpful by printing that.
>
It's useful.

Acked-by: Dong Aisheng <dong.aisheng@linaro.org>

BTW, one question below although it's not relatd to this patch itself.

> Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
> ---
> I somewhat mourn the loss of being able to tell from the debugfs
> which function is using a certain pin, does anyone have ideas on
> how to go about fixing this properly? The root file
> pinctrl-handles does tell it, but requires cross-referencing
> which isn't helpful.
> ---
> drivers/pinctrl/pinmux.c | 11 +++++++++--
> 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinmux.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinmux.c
> index 98b89d6..db5ed86 100644
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinmux.c
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinmux.c
> @@ -626,8 +626,8 @@ static int pinmux_pins_show(struct seq_file *s, void *what)
>
> /* The pin number can be retrived from the pin controller descriptor */
> for (i = 0; i < pctldev->desc->npins; i++) {
> -
> struct pin_desc *desc;
> + const char *owner;
>
> pin = pctldev->desc->pins[i].number;
> desc = pin_desc_get(pctldev, pin);
> @@ -635,9 +635,16 @@ static int pinmux_pins_show(struct seq_file *s, void *what)
> if (desc == NULL)
> continue;
>
> + if (!desc->owner)
> + owner = "UNCLAIMED";
> + else if (!strcmp(desc->owner, pinctrl_dev_get_name(pctldev)))
> + owner = "HOG";
> + else
> + owner = desc->owner;
> +
> seq_printf(s, "pin %d (%s): %s\n", pin,
> desc->name ? desc->name : "unnamed",
Is there a little issue?
For this line, i see some code:
static int pinctrl_register_one_pin(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev,
unsigned number, const char *name)
{
...
pindesc = kzalloc(sizeof(*pindesc), GFP_KERNEL);
if (pindesc == NULL)
return -ENOMEM;
...
/* Copy basic pin info */
if (name) {
pindesc->name = name;
} else {
pindesc->name = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "PIN%u", number);
if (pindesc->name == NULL)
return -ENOMEM;
pindesc->dynamic_name = true;
}
...
}
So is it possible the desc->name is NULL?

> - desc->owner ? desc->owner : "UNCLAIMED");
> + owner);
> }
>
> return 0;

Regards
Dong Aisheng



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-02-24 08:47    [W:0.435 / U:0.084 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site