On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Jan Kiszka <[email protected]> wrote: > First, the logic for translating a register bit to the return code of > exar_get_direction and exar_get_value were wrong. And second, there was > a flip regarding the register bank in exar_get_direction.
Again, I wish it was tested in the first place. After addressing below: FWIW: Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]> > @@ -68,7 +68,7 @@ static int exar_get(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int > reg) > value = readb(exar_gpio->regs + reg); > mutex_unlock(&exar_gpio->lock); > > - return !!value; > + return value; This one is correct. > @@ -80,7 +80,7 @@ static int exar_get_direction(struct gpio_chip *chip, > unsigned int offset) > addr = bank ? EXAR_OFFSET_MPIOSEL_HI : EXAR_OFFSET_MPIOSEL_LO; > val = exar_get(chip, addr) >> (offset % 8); > > - return !!val; > + return val & 1; It should be rather val = exar_get(chip, addr) & BIT(offset % 8); > } > > static int exar_get_value(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int offset) > @@ -89,10 +89,10 @@ static int exar_get_value(struct gpio_chip *chip, > unsigned int offset) > unsigned int addr; > int val; > > - addr = bank ? EXAR_OFFSET_MPIOLVL_LO : EXAR_OFFSET_MPIOLVL_HI; > + addr = bank ? EXAR_OFFSET_MPIOLVL_HI : EXAR_OFFSET_MPIOLVL_LO; Good catch! > val = exar_get(chip, addr) >> (offset % 8); > > - return !!val; > + return val & 1; Ditto (see above). -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
