Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 -next] Input: gpio_keys: set input direction explicitly for gpio keys | From | Sudeep Holla <> | Date | Wed, 16 Nov 2016 18:39:29 +0000 |
| |
On 16/11/16 18:34, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 05:42:15PM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote: >> >> >> On 16/11/16 17:36, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: >>> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 01:42:14PM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote: >>>> Commit 700a38b27eef ("Input: gpio_keys - switch to using generic device >>>> properties") switched to use generic device properties for GPIO keys and >>>> commit 5feeca3c1e39 ("Input: gpio_keys - add support for GPIO descriptors") >>>> switched from legacy GPIO numbers to GPIO descriptors. >>>> >>>> Previously devm_gpio_request_one was explicitly passed GPIOF_DIR_IN flag >>>> to set the GPIO direction as input. However devm_get_gpiod_from_child >>>> doesn't have such provisions and hence fwnode_get_named_gpiod can't set >>>> it as input. >>>> >>>> This breaks few platforms with the following error: >>>> " gpiochip_lock_as_irq: tried to flag a GPIO set as output for IRQ >>>> unable to lock HW IRQ <n> for IRQ >>>> genirq: Failed to request resources for POWER (irq <x>) on irqchip >>>> gpio_keys: Unable to claim irq <x>; error -22 >>>> gpio-keys: probe failed with error -22 " >>>> >>>> This patch fixes the issue by setting input direction explicitly for >>>> gpio input keys. It also remove the existing GPIOF_DIR_IN flag setting >>>> for the legacy gpios and merges into single gpiod_direction_input call. >>>> >>>> Fixes: 700a38b27eef ("Input: gpio_keys - switch to using generic device properties") >>>> Cc: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> >>>> Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> >>>> Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be> >>>> Cc: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com> >>>> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> >>>> --- >>>> drivers/input/keyboard/gpio_keys.c | 5 ++++- >>>> drivers/input/keyboard/gpio_keys_polled.c | 5 ++++- >>>> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> v1->v2: >>>> - Fix the build(had sent a wrong version by accident) >>>> >>>> Hi Dmitry, >>>> >>>> The other option would be to pass the flag explicitly and add support to >>>> handle it in the path devm_get_gpiod_from_child would take. >>> >>> Hi Sudeep, >>> >>> No, I think explicitly configuring it for input is good (at least for >>> now), but we need error handling. >>> >> >> Sure, a quick glance makes me think: all I need is to return the error >> as everything is handled by devm_* APIs. If so I will respin with that >> change, otherwise please let me know if I am missing anything here. > > No, I think that is it. >
Thanks for the confirmation, fixed and sent v3.
-- Regards, Sudeep
| |