From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
Instead of acpi_get_and_request_gpiod() + gpiod_toggle_active_low(), use
temporary lookup tables with appropriate lookup flags.
Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
---
drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c | 12 ++++--------
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c
index bca1ce7d0d0c..62e0cd5207a7 100644
--- a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c
+++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c
@@ -25,18 +25,14 @@ int skl_int3472_register_pled(struct int3472_discrete_device *int3472,
if (int3472->pled.classdev.dev)
return -EBUSY;
- int3472->pled.gpio = acpi_get_and_request_gpiod(path, agpio->pin_table[0],
- "int3472,privacy-led");
+ int3472->pled.gpio = skl_int3472_gpiod_get_from_temp_lookup(
+ int3472->dev, path, agpio->pin_table[0],
+ "int3472,privacy-led", polarity,
+ GPIOD_OUT_LOW);
if (IS_ERR(int3472->pled.gpio))
return dev_err_probe(int3472->dev, PTR_ERR(int3472->pled.gpio),
"getting privacy LED GPIO\n");
- if (polarity == GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW)
- gpiod_toggle_active_low(int3472->pled.gpio);
-
- /* Ensure the pin is in output mode and non-active state */
- gpiod_direction_output(int3472->pled.gpio, 0);
-
/* Generate the name, replacing the ':' in the ACPI devname with '_' */
snprintf(int3472->pled.name, sizeof(int3472->pled.name),
"%s::privacy_led", acpi_dev_name(int3472->sensor));
--
2.39.2Hi,
On 9/26/23 16:59, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
>
> Instead of acpi_get_and_request_gpiod() + gpiod_toggle_active_low(), use
> temporary lookup tables with appropriate lookup flags.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
> ---
> drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c | 12 ++++--------
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c
> index bca1ce7d0d0c..62e0cd5207a7 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c
> @@ -25,18 +25,14 @@ int skl_int3472_register_pled(struct int3472_discrete_device *int3472,
> if (int3472->pled.classdev.dev)
> return -EBUSY;
>
> - int3472->pled.gpio = acpi_get_and_request_gpiod(path, agpio->pin_table[0],
> - "int3472,privacy-led");
> + int3472->pled.gpio = skl_int3472_gpiod_get_from_temp_lookup(
> + int3472->dev, path, agpio->pin_table[0],
> + "int3472,privacy-led", polarity,
> + GPIOD_OUT_LOW);
Yeah so this is not going to work, path here is an ACPI device path, e.g.
on my laptop (which actually uses the INT3472 glue code) the path-s of
the 2 GPIO controllers are: `\_SB_.GPI0` resp `\_SB_.PC00.XHCI.RHUB.HS08.VGPO`
Where as skl_int3472_gpiod_get_from_temp_lookup() stores the passed in path
in gpiod_lookup_table.table[0].key, which is the dev_name() of the GPIO
controller's parent dev which are `INTC1055:00` resp. `INTC1096:00` .
So we are going to need to add some code to INT3472 to go from path to
a correct value for gpiod_lookup_table.table[0].key which means partly
reproducing most of acpi_get_gpiod:
struct gpio_chip *chip;
acpi_handle handle;
acpi_status status;
status = acpi_get_handle(NULL, path, &handle);
if (ACPI_FAILURE(status))
return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
chip = gpiochip_find(handle, acpi_gpiochip_find);
if (!chip)
return ERR_PTR(-EPROBE_DEFER);
And then get the key from the chip. Which means using gpiochip_find
in the int3472 code now, which does not sound like an improvement.
I think that was is needed instead is adding an active_low flag
to acpi_get_and_request_gpiod() and then have that directly
set the active-low flag on the returned desc.
Regards,
Hans
> if (IS_ERR(int3472->pled.gpio))
> return dev_err_probe(int3472->dev, PTR_ERR(int3472->pled.gpio),
> "getting privacy LED GPIO\n");
>
> - if (polarity == GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW)
> - gpiod_toggle_active_low(int3472->pled.gpio);
> -
> - /* Ensure the pin is in output mode and non-active state */
> - gpiod_direction_output(int3472->pled.gpio, 0);
> -
> /* Generate the name, replacing the ':' in the ACPI devname with '_' */
> snprintf(int3472->pled.name, sizeof(int3472->pled.name),
> "%s::privacy_led", acpi_dev_name(int3472->sensor));
On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 11:40 AM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > On 9/26/23 16:59, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org> > > > > Instead of acpi_get_and_request_gpiod() + gpiod_toggle_active_low(), use > > temporary lookup tables with appropriate lookup flags. > > > > Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org> > > --- > > drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c | 12 ++++-------- > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c > > index bca1ce7d0d0c..62e0cd5207a7 100644 > > --- a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c > > +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c > > @@ -25,18 +25,14 @@ int skl_int3472_register_pled(struct int3472_discrete_device *int3472, > > if (int3472->pled.classdev.dev) > > return -EBUSY; > > > > - int3472->pled.gpio = acpi_get_and_request_gpiod(path, agpio->pin_table[0], > > - "int3472,privacy-led"); > > + int3472->pled.gpio = skl_int3472_gpiod_get_from_temp_lookup( > > + int3472->dev, path, agpio->pin_table[0], > > + "int3472,privacy-led", polarity, > > + GPIOD_OUT_LOW); > > Yeah so this is not going to work, path here is an ACPI device path, e.g. > on my laptop (which actually uses the INT3472 glue code) the path-s of > the 2 GPIO controllers are: `\_SB_.GPI0` resp `\_SB_.PC00.XHCI.RHUB.HS08.VGPO` > > Where as skl_int3472_gpiod_get_from_temp_lookup() stores the passed in path > in gpiod_lookup_table.table[0].key, which is the dev_name() of the GPIO > controller's parent dev which are `INTC1055:00` resp. `INTC1096:00` . > > So we are going to need to add some code to INT3472 to go from path to > a correct value for gpiod_lookup_table.table[0].key which means partly > reproducing most of acpi_get_gpiod: > > struct gpio_chip *chip; > acpi_handle handle; > acpi_status status; > > status = acpi_get_handle(NULL, path, &handle); > if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) > return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV); > > chip = gpiochip_find(handle, acpi_gpiochip_find); > if (!chip) > return ERR_PTR(-EPROBE_DEFER); > > And then get the key from the chip. Which means using gpiochip_find > in the int3472 code now, which does not sound like an improvement. > > I think that was is needed instead is adding an active_low flag > to acpi_get_and_request_gpiod() and then have that directly > set the active-low flag on the returned desc. > Ultimately I'd like everyone to use gpiod_get() for getting descriptors but for now I get it's enough. Are you find with this being done in a single patch across GPIO and this driver? Bart > Regards, > > Hans > > > > > > > > > > if (IS_ERR(int3472->pled.gpio)) > > return dev_err_probe(int3472->dev, PTR_ERR(int3472->pled.gpio), > > "getting privacy LED GPIO\n"); > > > > - if (polarity == GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW) > > - gpiod_toggle_active_low(int3472->pled.gpio); > > - > > - /* Ensure the pin is in output mode and non-active state */ > > - gpiod_direction_output(int3472->pled.gpio, 0); > > - > > /* Generate the name, replacing the ':' in the ACPI devname with '_' */ > > snprintf(int3472->pled.name, sizeof(int3472->pled.name), > > "%s::privacy_led", acpi_dev_name(int3472->sensor)); >
Hi Bart, On 9/27/23 12:44, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 11:40 AM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> On 9/26/23 16:59, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: >>> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org> >>> >>> Instead of acpi_get_and_request_gpiod() + gpiod_toggle_active_low(), use >>> temporary lookup tables with appropriate lookup flags. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org> >>> --- >>> drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c | 12 ++++-------- >>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c >>> index bca1ce7d0d0c..62e0cd5207a7 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c >>> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c >>> @@ -25,18 +25,14 @@ int skl_int3472_register_pled(struct int3472_discrete_device *int3472, >>> if (int3472->pled.classdev.dev) >>> return -EBUSY; >>> >>> - int3472->pled.gpio = acpi_get_and_request_gpiod(path, agpio->pin_table[0], >>> - "int3472,privacy-led"); >>> + int3472->pled.gpio = skl_int3472_gpiod_get_from_temp_lookup( >>> + int3472->dev, path, agpio->pin_table[0], >>> + "int3472,privacy-led", polarity, >>> + GPIOD_OUT_LOW); >> >> Yeah so this is not going to work, path here is an ACPI device path, e.g. >> on my laptop (which actually uses the INT3472 glue code) the path-s of >> the 2 GPIO controllers are: `\_SB_.GPI0` resp `\_SB_.PC00.XHCI.RHUB.HS08.VGPO` >> >> Where as skl_int3472_gpiod_get_from_temp_lookup() stores the passed in path >> in gpiod_lookup_table.table[0].key, which is the dev_name() of the GPIO >> controller's parent dev which are `INTC1055:00` resp. `INTC1096:00` . >> >> So we are going to need to add some code to INT3472 to go from path to >> a correct value for gpiod_lookup_table.table[0].key which means partly >> reproducing most of acpi_get_gpiod: >> >> struct gpio_chip *chip; >> acpi_handle handle; >> acpi_status status; >> >> status = acpi_get_handle(NULL, path, &handle); >> if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) >> return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV); >> >> chip = gpiochip_find(handle, acpi_gpiochip_find); >> if (!chip) >> return ERR_PTR(-EPROBE_DEFER); >> >> And then get the key from the chip. Which means using gpiochip_find >> in the int3472 code now, which does not sound like an improvement. >> >> I think that was is needed instead is adding an active_low flag >> to acpi_get_and_request_gpiod() and then have that directly >> set the active-low flag on the returned desc. >> > > Ultimately I'd like everyone to use gpiod_get() for getting > descriptors but for now I get it's enough. Are you find with this > being done in a single patch across GPIO and this driver? Yes doing this in a single patch is fine. Also I'm fine with merging such a patch through the gpio tree . Regards, Hans >>> if (IS_ERR(int3472->pled.gpio)) >>> return dev_err_probe(int3472->dev, PTR_ERR(int3472->pled.gpio), >>> "getting privacy LED GPIO\n"); >>> >>> - if (polarity == GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW) >>> - gpiod_toggle_active_low(int3472->pled.gpio); >>> - >>> - /* Ensure the pin is in output mode and non-active state */ >>> - gpiod_direction_output(int3472->pled.gpio, 0); >>> - >>> /* Generate the name, replacing the ':' in the ACPI devname with '_' */ >>> snprintf(int3472->pled.name, sizeof(int3472->pled.name), >>> "%s::privacy_led", acpi_dev_name(int3472->sensor)); >> >
Hi Again,
On 9/27/23 15:08, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi Bart,
>
> On 9/27/23 12:44, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 11:40 AM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 9/26/23 16:59, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>>>> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
>>>>
>>>> Instead of acpi_get_and_request_gpiod() + gpiod_toggle_active_low(), use
>>>> temporary lookup tables with appropriate lookup flags.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c | 12 ++++--------
>>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c
>>>> index bca1ce7d0d0c..62e0cd5207a7 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c
>>>> @@ -25,18 +25,14 @@ int skl_int3472_register_pled(struct int3472_discrete_device *int3472,
>>>> if (int3472->pled.classdev.dev)
>>>> return -EBUSY;
>>>>
>>>> - int3472->pled.gpio = acpi_get_and_request_gpiod(path, agpio->pin_table[0],
>>>> - "int3472,privacy-led");
>>>> + int3472->pled.gpio = skl_int3472_gpiod_get_from_temp_lookup(
>>>> + int3472->dev, path, agpio->pin_table[0],
>>>> + "int3472,privacy-led", polarity,
>>>> + GPIOD_OUT_LOW);
>>>
>>> Yeah so this is not going to work, path here is an ACPI device path, e.g.
>>> on my laptop (which actually uses the INT3472 glue code) the path-s of
>>> the 2 GPIO controllers are: `\_SB_.GPI0` resp `\_SB_.PC00.XHCI.RHUB.HS08.VGPO`
>>>
>>> Where as skl_int3472_gpiod_get_from_temp_lookup() stores the passed in path
>>> in gpiod_lookup_table.table[0].key, which is the dev_name() of the GPIO
>>> controller's parent dev which are `INTC1055:00` resp. `INTC1096:00` .
>>>
>>> So we are going to need to add some code to INT3472 to go from path to
>>> a correct value for gpiod_lookup_table.table[0].key which means partly
>>> reproducing most of acpi_get_gpiod:
>>>
>>> struct gpio_chip *chip;
>>> acpi_handle handle;
>>> acpi_status status;
>>>
>>> status = acpi_get_handle(NULL, path, &handle);
>>> if (ACPI_FAILURE(status))
>>> return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
>>>
>>> chip = gpiochip_find(handle, acpi_gpiochip_find);
>>> if (!chip)
>>> return ERR_PTR(-EPROBE_DEFER);
>>>
>>> And then get the key from the chip. Which means using gpiochip_find
>>> in the int3472 code now, which does not sound like an improvement.
>>>
>>> I think that was is needed instead is adding an active_low flag
>>> to acpi_get_and_request_gpiod() and then have that directly
>>> set the active-low flag on the returned desc.
>>>
>>
>> Ultimately I'd like everyone to use gpiod_get() for getting
>> descriptors but for now I get it's enough. Are you find with this
>> being done in a single patch across GPIO and this driver?
>
> Yes doing this in a single patch is fine.
>
> Also I'm fine with merging such a patch through the gpio tree .
So thinking about this more I realized that the int3472 code already
generates GPIO lookups for the sensor device for some
(powerdown, reset) GPIOs, it only needs the gpio_desc for
the case where the GPIO is turned into a regulator, clock or led.
Since the int3472 code is already generating lookups it already
has a way to go from path to a lookup "key":
status = acpi_get_handle(NULL, path, &handle);
if (ACPI_FAILURE(status))
return -EINVAL;
adev = acpi_fetch_acpi_dev(handle);
if (!adev)
return -ENODEV;
table_entry->key = acpi_dev_name(adev);
So we can get the key without needing to call gpio_find_chip()
So I do believe that the temp lookup approach should actually
work. I'm currently traveling, so no promises but I should
be able to rework your series in something which actually
works and which will:
1. Stop using gpiod_toggle_active_low()
2. Allow dropping acpi_get_and_request_gpiod()
So no need for a patch to add an active-low parameter to
acpi_get_and_request_gpiod(), sorry about the noise.
Regards,
Hans
>>>> if (IS_ERR(int3472->pled.gpio))
>>>> return dev_err_probe(int3472->dev, PTR_ERR(int3472->pled.gpio),
>>>> "getting privacy LED GPIO\n");
>>>>
>>>> - if (polarity == GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW)
>>>> - gpiod_toggle_active_low(int3472->pled.gpio);
>>>> -
>>>> - /* Ensure the pin is in output mode and non-active state */
>>>> - gpiod_direction_output(int3472->pled.gpio, 0);
>>>> -
>>>> /* Generate the name, replacing the ':' in the ACPI devname with '_' */
>>>> snprintf(int3472->pled.name, sizeof(int3472->pled.name),
>>>> "%s::privacy_led", acpi_dev_name(int3472->sensor));
>>>
>>
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 04:59:41PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org> > > Instead of acpi_get_and_request_gpiod() + gpiod_toggle_active_low(), use > temporary lookup tables with appropriate lookup flags. ... > + int3472->pled.gpio = skl_int3472_gpiod_get_from_temp_lookup( > + int3472->dev, path, agpio->pin_table[0], > + "int3472,privacy-led", polarity, > + GPIOD_OUT_LOW); Personally I found this style weird. I prefer to have longer line over the split on the parentheses. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 5:27 PM Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 04:59:41PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org> > > > > Instead of acpi_get_and_request_gpiod() + gpiod_toggle_active_low(), use > > temporary lookup tables with appropriate lookup flags. > > ... > > > + int3472->pled.gpio = skl_int3472_gpiod_get_from_temp_lookup( > > + int3472->dev, path, agpio->pin_table[0], > > + "int3472,privacy-led", polarity, > > + GPIOD_OUT_LOW); > > Personally I found this style weird. I prefer to have longer line over > the split on the parentheses. > I in turn prefer this one. Checkpatch doesn't complain either way so I'll leave it to the maintainers of this driver to decide. Bart
HI, On 9/27/23 09:02, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 5:27 PM Andy Shevchenko > <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote: >> >> On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 04:59:41PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: >>> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org> >>> >>> Instead of acpi_get_and_request_gpiod() + gpiod_toggle_active_low(), use >>> temporary lookup tables with appropriate lookup flags. >> >> ... >> >>> + int3472->pled.gpio = skl_int3472_gpiod_get_from_temp_lookup( >>> + int3472->dev, path, agpio->pin_table[0], >>> + "int3472,privacy-led", polarity, >>> + GPIOD_OUT_LOW); >> >> Personally I found this style weird. I prefer to have longer line over >> the split on the parentheses. >> > > I in turn prefer this one. Checkpatch doesn't complain either way so > I'll leave it to the maintainers of this driver to decide. I'm fine with keeping this as is, using longer lines does not seem to make things better here. Regards, Hans
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.