Hi Heiko, On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 at 02:29, Heiko Schocher <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello Simon, > > Am 10.12.2019 um 13:39 schrieb Simon Glass: > > Hi Heiko, > > > > On Wed, 30 Oct 2019 at 04:29, Heiko Schocher <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> dm_gpio_lookup_name() searches for a gpio through > >> the bank name. But we have also gpio labels, and it > >> makes sense to search for a gpio also in the labels > >> we have defined, if no gpio is found through the > >> bank name definition. > >> > >> This is useful for example if you have a wp pin on > >> different gpios on different board versions. > >> > >> If dm_gpio_lookup_name() searches also for the gpio labels, > >> you can give the gpio an unique label name and search > >> for this label, and do not need to differ between > >> board revisions. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Heiko Schocher <[email protected]> > >> --- > >> > >> Example on the aristainetos board: > >> > >> => gpio clear wp_spi_nor.gpio-hog > >> gpio: pin wp_spi_nor.gpio-hog (gpio 47) value is 0 > >> => > >> > >> before this patch, you need to know where your > >> pin is: > >> > >> => gpio clear GPIO2_15 > >> gpio: pin GPIO2_15 (gpio 47) value is 0 > >> => > >> > >> travis build: > >> https://travis-ci.org/hsdenx/u-boot-test/builds/604290746 > >> > >> drivers/gpio/gpio-uclass.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++ > >> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+) > > > > Thanks for making this so clear. > > > > I have been wondering whether this should be enabled by a CONFIG but > > in fact it doesn't add much and the lookup function is only called by > > those who are not using the device-tree phandle mechanism. > > > But I think it needs two changes: > > - Move code into a separate function called from dm_gpio_lookup_name() > > done. > > > - Add a sandbox test for both cases > > Do you mean to add tests in "test/dm/gpio.c" ?
Yes that's right. Regards, SImon
