drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/hw.c | 7 ++----- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
No need to manually free the gpio now.
Remove if statement as it's redundant now. The gpio bit now gets cleared
whether set or not.
Signed-off-by: Rosen Penev <rosenp@gmail.com>
---
drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/hw.c | 7 ++-----
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/hw.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/hw.c
index 5982e0db45f9..dc18a813f1a0 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/hw.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/hw.c
@@ -2732,7 +2732,7 @@ static void ath9k_hw_gpio_cfg_soc(struct ath_hw *ah, u32 gpio, bool out,
if (ah->caps.gpio_requested & BIT(gpio))
return;
- err = gpio_request_one(gpio, out ? GPIOF_OUT_INIT_LOW : GPIOF_IN, label);
+ err = devm_gpio_request_one(ah->dev, gpio, out ? GPIOF_OUT_INIT_LOW : GPIOF_IN, label);
if (err) {
ath_err(ath9k_hw_common(ah), "request GPIO%d failed:%d\n",
gpio, err);
@@ -2801,10 +2801,7 @@ void ath9k_hw_gpio_free(struct ath_hw *ah, u32 gpio)
WARN_ON(gpio >= ah->caps.num_gpio_pins);
- if (ah->caps.gpio_requested & BIT(gpio)) {
- gpio_free(gpio);
- ah->caps.gpio_requested &= ~BIT(gpio);
- }
+ ah->caps.gpio_requested &= ~BIT(gpio);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(ath9k_hw_gpio_free);
--
2.45.2
Rosen Penev <rosenp@gmail.com> writes: > No need to manually free the gpio now. > > Remove if statement as it's redundant now. The gpio bit now gets cleared > whether set or not. > > Signed-off-by: Rosen Penev <rosenp@gmail.com> So presumably these will conflict with this patch? https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/patch/3b46f6c7-4372-4cc9-9a7c-2c1c06d29324@gmail.com/ -Toke
On Thu, Aug 1, 2024 at 1:26 AM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@kernel.org> wrote: > > Rosen Penev <rosenp@gmail.com> writes: > > > No need to manually free the gpio now. > > > > Remove if statement as it's redundant now. The gpio bit now gets cleared > > whether set or not. > > > > Signed-off-by: Rosen Penev <rosenp@gmail.com> > > So presumably these will conflict with this patch? > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/patch/3b46f6c7-4372-4cc9-9a7c-2c1c06d29324@gmail.com/ This does not look related. > > -Toke
Rosen Penev <rosenp@gmail.com> writes: > On Thu, Aug 1, 2024 at 1:26 AM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@kernel.org> wrote: >> >> Rosen Penev <rosenp@gmail.com> writes: >> >> > No need to manually free the gpio now. >> > >> > Remove if statement as it's redundant now. The gpio bit now gets cleared >> > whether set or not. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Rosen Penev <rosenp@gmail.com> >> >> So presumably these will conflict with this patch? >> >> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/patch/3b46f6c7-4372-4cc9-9a7c-2c1c06d29324@gmail.com/ > This does not look related. Ah, no, you're right; was confusing the PCI-internal device managed thing with the generic one :) -Toke
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.