From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from metis.ext.pengutronix.de ([2001:6f8:1178:4:290:27ff:fe1d:cc33]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.76 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1TlwmS-0005X5-Jo for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 07:12:29 +0000 Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 08:12:23 +0100 From: Sascha Hauer Message-ID: <20121221071223.GK26326@pengutronix.de> References: <20121220131250.GG26483@game.jcrosoft.org> <1356013440-23651-1-git-send-email-plagnioj@jcrosoft.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1356013440-23651-1-git-send-email-plagnioj@jcrosoft.com> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: barebox-bounces@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] gpiolib: add gpio_request and gpio_free support To: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD Cc: barebox@lists.infradead.org On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 03:23:59PM +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > as today if no request or free provided do not complain > > if the gpio is not request auto requested at first use > > Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD > --- > drivers/gpio/gpio.c | 87 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- > include/gpio.h | 7 +++++ > 2 files changed, 87 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio.c > index 042a062..e29f0ba 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio.c > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio.c > @@ -1,19 +1,71 @@ > #include > #include > #include > +#include > > static LIST_HEAD(chip_list); > > -static struct gpio_chip *gpio_desc[ARCH_NR_GPIOS]; > +struct gpio_info { > + struct gpio_chip *chip; > + bool requested; > + char *label; > +}; > + > +static struct gpio_info gpio_desc[ARCH_NR_GPIOS]; > + > +int gpio_request(unsigned gpio, const char *label) > +{ > + struct gpio_info *gi = &gpio_desc[gpio]; > + struct gpio_chip *chip = gi->chip; > + int ret; > + > + if (!gpio_is_valid(gpio)) > + return -EINVAL; > + if (!chip) > + return -EINVAL; > + if (gi->requested) > + return -ENODEV; -EBUSY? > void gpio_set_value(unsigned gpio, int value) > { > - struct gpio_chip *chip = gpio_desc[gpio]; > + struct gpio_info *gi = &gpio_desc[gpio]; > + struct gpio_chip *chip = gi->chip; > > if (!gpio_is_valid(gpio)) > return; > if (!chip) > return; > + if (!gi->requested && gpio_request(gpio, "gpio")) > + return; Could you factor out this into a gpio_ensure_requested function? This way we would have a single point where the implicit gpio_request calls are handled. Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox