Tyler Hall <[email protected]> writes: >> The issue with multiple gpiochips per of-node could be worked around as >> followed I believe, comments? >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c >> index 08261f2..43984ab 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c >> @@ -47,11 +47,12 @@ static int of_gpiochip_find_and_xlate(struct gpio_chip >> *gc, void *data) >> ret = gc->of_xlate(gc, &gg_data->gpiospec, gg_data->flags); >> if (ret < 0) { >> /* We've found the gpio chip, but the translation failed. >> - * Return true to stop looking and return the translation >> - * error via out_gpio >> + * Store translation error in out_gpio. >> + * Return false to keep looking, as more than one GPIO chip >> + * could be registered per of-node. >> */ >> gg_data->out_gpio = ERR_PTR(ret); >> - return true; >> + return false; >> } >> >> gg_data->out_gpio = gpiochip_get_desc(gc, ret); > > As long as we're ok with multiple gpiochips per of-node, this would > work for me. It'll change the preference of which chip returns the > error in the case of multiple chips, but that's already undefined > behavior.
Looks good to me too, this will solve my issue, and the global behavior would be consistent with the former one. Would you care submitting a proper patch so that we can apply our Reviewed-by, Tested-by etc ... ? Cheers. -- Robert -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
