Fabio Estevam <[email protected]> writes:

> Since the "power" GPIO is mapped as active-low, its actual signal will be 0
> after this code. Contrary to the legacy integer GPIO interface, the active-low
> property is handled during mapping and is thus transparent to GPIO consumers."
>
> ,which is exactly what we want in the gpio reset case: we want it to
> output in its active level first.
I didn't know that.

> So your patch should do like this:
>
>  +       if (nop->gpiod_reset)
>  +               gpiod_direction_output(nop->gpiod_reset, 1);
>
> This will guarantee that we keep the same behaviour as we had prior to
> the introduction of gpiod.
That's true, the GPIOF_OUT_INIT_LOW/HIGH in the former code just struck me.

> I plan to submit a separate fix on top of yours that puts the delay in
> the correct position.
>
> This separate issue exists even prior to the gpiod api inclusion.
>
> What we need to do:
>
> - Force the GPIO in its active reset level state
I will take care of that, as it's a regression introduced by my patch.

> - Wait a bit
> - Put the GPIO out of reset.
Ah, that one will be for you :)

> ,but I can handle this one after your patch gets applied.
OK, let's do that.

Cheers.

-- 
Robert
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to