Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 30 Jan 2015 09:01:53 -0800 | From | Ray Jui <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/4] pinctrl: Broadcom Cygnus pinctrl device tree binding |
| |
On 1/30/2015 6:18 AM, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 7:49 AM, Ray Jui <rjui@broadcom.com> wrote: > >> I dig into the pinctrl framework code a bit more and found that I can >> use pinctrl_request_gpio from the GPIO driver and implement >> gpio_request_enable in the pinctrl driver. > > Yep :) ain't it nice. > >> The only problem I see now is that these APIs seem to expect the use of >> global GPIO numbers? > > No they don't, only if you use the deprecated pinctrl_add_gpio_range(). > > Instead, when you register your struct gpio_chip, use > gpiochip_add_pin_range() and this will use relative offsets > without relying on global GPIO numbers. > > This latter call replaces pinctrl_add_gpio_range(). > >> I hope I'm not missing something here? > > You're missing gpiochip_add_pin_range() ;) > > Yours, > Linus Walleij > Yeah, I realized this while implementing the driver, :)
I'm now in the final testing/cleaning phase of both Cygnus pinmux and gpio/pinconf driver. I really appreciate that the pinctrl framework allows the two to work seamlessly with each other and at the same time provides the necessary interface to bridge the two, :)
I should be able to send out the patches of the two drivers for review sometime next week.
Thanks for the help!
Ray
| |