Some of the contents of struct acpi_gpio_lookup repeats what we have
in the struct acpi_gpio_params. Reuse the latter in the former.
Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
---
drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++----------------
1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c
index afeb8d1c7102..750724601106 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c
@@ -744,9 +744,7 @@ static int acpi_gpio_update_gpiod_lookup_flags(unsigned long *lookupflags,
struct acpi_gpio_lookup {
struct acpi_gpio_info info;
- int index;
- u16 pin_index;
- bool active_low;
+ struct acpi_gpio_params par;
struct gpio_desc *desc;
int n;
};
@@ -754,6 +752,7 @@ struct acpi_gpio_lookup {
static int acpi_populate_gpio_lookup(struct acpi_resource *ares, void *data)
{
struct acpi_gpio_lookup *lookup = data;
+ struct acpi_gpio_params *par = &lookup->par;
if (ares->type != ACPI_RESOURCE_TYPE_GPIO)
return 1;
@@ -765,12 +764,12 @@ static int acpi_populate_gpio_lookup(struct acpi_resource *ares, void *data)
u16 pin_index;
if (lookup->info.quirks & ACPI_GPIO_QUIRK_ONLY_GPIOIO && gpioint)
- lookup->index++;
+ par->crs_entry_index++;
- if (lookup->n++ != lookup->index)
+ if (lookup->n++ != par->crs_entry_index)
return 1;
- pin_index = lookup->pin_index;
+ pin_index = par->line_index;
if (pin_index >= agpio->pin_table_length)
return 1;
@@ -796,7 +795,7 @@ static int acpi_populate_gpio_lookup(struct acpi_resource *ares, void *data)
lookup->info.polarity = agpio->polarity;
lookup->info.triggering = agpio->triggering;
} else {
- lookup->info.polarity = lookup->active_low;
+ lookup->info.polarity = par->active_low;
}
lookup->info.flags = acpi_gpio_to_gpiod_flags(agpio, lookup->info.polarity);
@@ -834,7 +833,8 @@ static int acpi_gpio_property_lookup(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode, const char *p
struct acpi_gpio_lookup *lookup)
{
struct fwnode_reference_args args;
- unsigned int index = lookup->index;
+ struct acpi_gpio_params *par = &lookup->par;
+ unsigned int index = par->crs_entry_index;
unsigned int quirks = 0;
int ret;
@@ -857,9 +857,9 @@ static int acpi_gpio_property_lookup(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode, const char *p
if (args.nargs != 3)
return -EPROTO;
- lookup->index = args.args[0];
- lookup->pin_index = args.args[1];
- lookup->active_low = !!args.args[2];
+ par->crs_entry_index = args.args[0];
+ par->line_index = args.args[1];
+ par->active_low = !!args.args[2];
lookup->info.adev = to_acpi_device_node(args.fwnode);
lookup->info.quirks = quirks;
@@ -897,10 +897,11 @@ static struct gpio_desc *acpi_get_gpiod_by_index(struct acpi_device *adev,
struct acpi_gpio_info *info)
{
struct acpi_gpio_lookup lookup;
+ struct acpi_gpio_params *par = &lookup.par;
int ret;
memset(&lookup, 0, sizeof(lookup));
- lookup.index = index;
+ par->crs_entry_index = index;
if (propname) {
dev_dbg(&adev->dev, "GPIO: looking up %s\n", propname);
@@ -909,9 +910,9 @@ static struct gpio_desc *acpi_get_gpiod_by_index(struct acpi_device *adev,
if (ret)
return ERR_PTR(ret);
- dev_dbg(&adev->dev, "GPIO: _DSD returned %s %d %u %u\n",
- dev_name(&lookup.info.adev->dev), lookup.index,
- lookup.pin_index, lookup.active_low);
+ dev_dbg(&adev->dev, "GPIO: _DSD returned %s %u %u %u\n",
+ dev_name(&lookup.info.adev->dev),
+ par->crs_entry_index, par->line_index, par->active_low);
} else {
dev_dbg(&adev->dev, "GPIO: looking up %d in _CRS\n", index);
lookup.info.adev = adev;
@@ -943,6 +944,7 @@ static struct gpio_desc *acpi_get_gpiod_from_data(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode,
struct acpi_gpio_info *info)
{
struct acpi_gpio_lookup lookup;
+ struct acpi_gpio_params *par = &lookup.par;
int ret;
if (!is_acpi_data_node(fwnode))
@@ -952,7 +954,7 @@ static struct gpio_desc *acpi_get_gpiod_from_data(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode,
return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
memset(&lookup, 0, sizeof(lookup));
- lookup.index = index;
+ par->crs_entry_index = index;
ret = acpi_gpio_property_lookup(fwnode, propname, &lookup);
if (ret)
--
2.47.2On Wed, Apr 02, 2025 at 03:21:19PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> Some of the contents of struct acpi_gpio_lookup repeats what we have
> in the struct acpi_gpio_params. Reuse the latter in the former.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++----------------
> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c
> index afeb8d1c7102..750724601106 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c
> @@ -744,9 +744,7 @@ static int acpi_gpio_update_gpiod_lookup_flags(unsigned long *lookupflags,
>
> struct acpi_gpio_lookup {
> struct acpi_gpio_info info;
> - int index;
> - u16 pin_index;
> - bool active_low;
> + struct acpi_gpio_params par;
params is better name
> struct gpio_desc *desc;
> int n;
> };
> @@ -754,6 +752,7 @@ struct acpi_gpio_lookup {
> static int acpi_populate_gpio_lookup(struct acpi_resource *ares, void *data)
> {
> struct acpi_gpio_lookup *lookup = data;
> + struct acpi_gpio_params *par = &lookup->par;
These are not changed I guess so can this be const?
Ditto everywhere.
>
> if (ares->type != ACPI_RESOURCE_TYPE_GPIO)
> return 1;
> @@ -765,12 +764,12 @@ static int acpi_populate_gpio_lookup(struct acpi_resource *ares, void *data)
> u16 pin_index;
>
> if (lookup->info.quirks & ACPI_GPIO_QUIRK_ONLY_GPIOIO && gpioint)
> - lookup->index++;
> + par->crs_entry_index++;
>
> - if (lookup->n++ != lookup->index)
> + if (lookup->n++ != par->crs_entry_index)
> return 1;
>
> - pin_index = lookup->pin_index;
> + pin_index = par->line_index;
> if (pin_index >= agpio->pin_table_length)
> return 1;
>
> @@ -796,7 +795,7 @@ static int acpi_populate_gpio_lookup(struct acpi_resource *ares, void *data)
> lookup->info.polarity = agpio->polarity;
> lookup->info.triggering = agpio->triggering;
> } else {
> - lookup->info.polarity = lookup->active_low;
> + lookup->info.polarity = par->active_low;
> }
>
> lookup->info.flags = acpi_gpio_to_gpiod_flags(agpio, lookup->info.polarity);
> @@ -834,7 +833,8 @@ static int acpi_gpio_property_lookup(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode, const char *p
> struct acpi_gpio_lookup *lookup)
> {
> struct fwnode_reference_args args;
> - unsigned int index = lookup->index;
> + struct acpi_gpio_params *par = &lookup->par;
> + unsigned int index = par->crs_entry_index;
> unsigned int quirks = 0;
> int ret;
>
> @@ -857,9 +857,9 @@ static int acpi_gpio_property_lookup(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode, const char *p
> if (args.nargs != 3)
> return -EPROTO;
>
> - lookup->index = args.args[0];
> - lookup->pin_index = args.args[1];
> - lookup->active_low = !!args.args[2];
> + par->crs_entry_index = args.args[0];
> + par->line_index = args.args[1];
> + par->active_low = !!args.args[2];
>
> lookup->info.adev = to_acpi_device_node(args.fwnode);
> lookup->info.quirks = quirks;
> @@ -897,10 +897,11 @@ static struct gpio_desc *acpi_get_gpiod_by_index(struct acpi_device *adev,
> struct acpi_gpio_info *info)
> {
> struct acpi_gpio_lookup lookup;
> + struct acpi_gpio_params *par = &lookup.par;
> int ret;
>
> memset(&lookup, 0, sizeof(lookup));
> - lookup.index = index;
> + par->crs_entry_index = index;
>
> if (propname) {
> dev_dbg(&adev->dev, "GPIO: looking up %s\n", propname);
> @@ -909,9 +910,9 @@ static struct gpio_desc *acpi_get_gpiod_by_index(struct acpi_device *adev,
> if (ret)
> return ERR_PTR(ret);
>
> - dev_dbg(&adev->dev, "GPIO: _DSD returned %s %d %u %u\n",
> - dev_name(&lookup.info.adev->dev), lookup.index,
> - lookup.pin_index, lookup.active_low);
> + dev_dbg(&adev->dev, "GPIO: _DSD returned %s %u %u %u\n",
> + dev_name(&lookup.info.adev->dev),
> + par->crs_entry_index, par->line_index, par->active_low);
> } else {
> dev_dbg(&adev->dev, "GPIO: looking up %d in _CRS\n", index);
> lookup.info.adev = adev;
> @@ -943,6 +944,7 @@ static struct gpio_desc *acpi_get_gpiod_from_data(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode,
> struct acpi_gpio_info *info)
> {
> struct acpi_gpio_lookup lookup;
> + struct acpi_gpio_params *par = &lookup.par;
> int ret;
>
> if (!is_acpi_data_node(fwnode))
> @@ -952,7 +954,7 @@ static struct gpio_desc *acpi_get_gpiod_from_data(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode,
> return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
>
> memset(&lookup, 0, sizeof(lookup));
> - lookup.index = index;
> + par->crs_entry_index = index;
>
> ret = acpi_gpio_property_lookup(fwnode, propname, &lookup);
> if (ret)
> --
> 2.47.2
On Thu, Apr 03, 2025 at 01:35:06PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote: > On Wed, Apr 02, 2025 at 03:21:19PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > Some of the contents of struct acpi_gpio_lookup repeats what we have > > in the struct acpi_gpio_params. Reuse the latter in the former. > > + struct acpi_gpio_params par; > > params is better name It's been already used elsewhere in the code. Do you want renaming there as well for consistency's sake? ... > > struct acpi_gpio_lookup *lookup = data; > > + struct acpi_gpio_params *par = &lookup->par; > > These are not changed I guess so can this be const? They are, see below. So the answer, it can't. But I will double check and add const where it makes sense. ... > > if (lookup->info.quirks & ACPI_GPIO_QUIRK_ONLY_GPIOIO && gpioint) > > - lookup->index++; > > + par->crs_entry_index++; E.g., ^^^ -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
On Thu, Apr 03, 2025 at 02:04:04PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Thu, Apr 03, 2025 at 01:35:06PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 02, 2025 at 03:21:19PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > Some of the contents of struct acpi_gpio_lookup repeats what we have > > > in the struct acpi_gpio_params. Reuse the latter in the former. > > > > + struct acpi_gpio_params par; > > > > params is better name > > It's been already used elsewhere in the code. Do you want renaming there as > well for consistency's sake? If there is no problem confusing these then no need to rename anything else. > > ... > > > > struct acpi_gpio_lookup *lookup = data; > > > + struct acpi_gpio_params *par = &lookup->par; > > > > These are not changed I guess so can this be const? > > They are, see below. So the answer, it can't. Okay then nevermind.
On Thu, Apr 3, 2025 at 1:04 PM Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 03, 2025 at 01:35:06PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 02, 2025 at 03:21:19PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > Some of the contents of struct acpi_gpio_lookup repeats what we have > > > in the struct acpi_gpio_params. Reuse the latter in the former. > > > > + struct acpi_gpio_params par; > > > > params is better name > > It's been already used elsewhere in the code. Do you want renaming there as > well for consistency's sake? > +1 for using param or params here and elsewhere. It's much better than par. Bart
On Thu, Apr 03, 2025 at 01:57:22PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > On Thu, Apr 3, 2025 at 1:04 PM Andy Shevchenko > <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 03, 2025 at 01:35:06PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 02, 2025 at 03:21:19PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > Some of the contents of struct acpi_gpio_lookup repeats what we have > > > > in the struct acpi_gpio_params. Reuse the latter in the former. > > > > > > + struct acpi_gpio_params par; > > > > > > params is better name > > > > It's been already used elsewhere in the code. Do you want renaming there as > > well for consistency's sake? > > +1 for using param or params here and elsewhere. It's much better than par. Okay, will be an add-on in the next version. But I will wait for Mika and others to review the rest and give tags and/or comments where it applies. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.