diff mbox series

[04/15] gpio: bd71828: use new line value setter callbacks

Message ID 20250310-gpiochip-set-conversion-v1-4-03798bb833eb@linaro.org (mailing list archive)
State New
Delegated to: Geert Uytterhoeven
Headers show
Series gpio: more gpio_chip setter conversions | expand

Commit Message

Bartosz Golaszewski March 10, 2025, 12:40 p.m. UTC 
From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>

struct gpio_chip now has callbacks for setting line values that return
an integer, allowing to indicate failures. Convert the driver to using
them.

Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
---
 drivers/gpio/gpio-bd71828.c | 15 ++++++---------
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

Comments

Matti Vaittinen March 10, 2025, 1:20 p.m. UTC | #1 
On 10/03/2025 14:40, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
> 
> struct gpio_chip now has callbacks for setting line values that return
> an integer, allowing to indicate failures. Convert the driver to using
> them.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
> ---
>   drivers/gpio/gpio-bd71828.c | 15 ++++++---------
>   1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-bd71828.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-bd71828.c
> index b2ccc320c7b5..4ba151e5cf25 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-bd71828.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-bd71828.c
> @@ -16,10 +16,9 @@ struct bd71828_gpio {
>   	struct gpio_chip gpio;
>   };
>   
> -static void bd71828_gpio_set(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int offset,
> -			     int value)
> +static int bd71828_gpio_set(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int offset,
> +			    int value)
>   {
> -	int ret;
>   	struct bd71828_gpio *bdgpio = gpiochip_get_data(chip);
>   	u8 val = (value) ? BD71828_GPIO_OUT_HI : BD71828_GPIO_OUT_LO;
>   
> @@ -28,12 +27,10 @@ static void bd71828_gpio_set(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int offset,
>   	 * we are dealing with - then we are done
>   	 */
>   	if (offset == HALL_GPIO_OFFSET)
> -		return;
> +		return 0;

Should this be -EINVAL (or, can this check be just dropped?) Value of an 
input pin is tried to be set.

>   
> -	ret = regmap_update_bits(bdgpio->regmap, GPIO_OUT_REG(offset),
> -				 BD71828_GPIO_OUT_MASK, val);
> -	if (ret)
> -		dev_err(bdgpio->dev, "Could not set gpio to %d\n", value);
> +	return regmap_update_bits(bdgpio->regmap, GPIO_OUT_REG(offset),
> +				  BD71828_GPIO_OUT_MASK, val);
>   }
>   
>   static int bd71828_gpio_get(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int offset)
> @@ -112,7 +109,7 @@ static int bd71828_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>   	bdgpio->gpio.set_config = bd71828_gpio_set_config;
>   	bdgpio->gpio.can_sleep = true;
>   	bdgpio->gpio.get = bd71828_gpio_get;
> -	bdgpio->gpio.set = bd71828_gpio_set;
> +	bdgpio->gpio.set_rv = bd71828_gpio_set;
>   	bdgpio->gpio.base = -1;
>   
>   	/*
>
Bartosz Golaszewski March 10, 2025, 1:22 p.m. UTC | #2 
On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 2:20 PM Matti Vaittinen
<mazziesaccount@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > @@ -28,12 +27,10 @@ static void bd71828_gpio_set(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int offset,
> >        * we are dealing with - then we are done
> >        */
> >       if (offset == HALL_GPIO_OFFSET)
> > -             return;
> > +             return 0;
>
> Should this be -EINVAL (or, can this check be just dropped?) Value of an
> input pin is tried to be set.
>

I don't want to break existing users but I did notice that and figured
that we should rather check this in core GPIO code not each individual
driver.

I put that on my TODO list.

Bart
Matti Vaittinen March 10, 2025, 2:44 p.m. UTC | #3 
On 10/03/2025 15:22, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 2:20 PM Matti Vaittinen
> <mazziesaccount@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> @@ -28,12 +27,10 @@ static void bd71828_gpio_set(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int offset,
>>>         * we are dealing with - then we are done
>>>         */
>>>        if (offset == HALL_GPIO_OFFSET)
>>> -             return;
>>> +             return 0;
>>
>> Should this be -EINVAL (or, can this check be just dropped?) Value of an
>> input pin is tried to be set.
>>
> 
> I don't want to break existing users but I did notice that and figured
> that we should rather check this in core GPIO code not each individual
> driver.

Makes sense :) Thanks!

In that case,

Reviewed-by: Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@gmail.com>

> 
> I put that on my TODO list.
> 
> Bart
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-bd71828.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-bd71828.c
index b2ccc320c7b5..4ba151e5cf25 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-bd71828.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-bd71828.c
@@ -16,10 +16,9 @@  struct bd71828_gpio {
 	struct gpio_chip gpio;
 };
 
-static void bd71828_gpio_set(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int offset,
-			     int value)
+static int bd71828_gpio_set(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int offset,
+			    int value)
 {
-	int ret;
 	struct bd71828_gpio *bdgpio = gpiochip_get_data(chip);
 	u8 val = (value) ? BD71828_GPIO_OUT_HI : BD71828_GPIO_OUT_LO;
 
@@ -28,12 +27,10 @@  static void bd71828_gpio_set(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int offset,
 	 * we are dealing with - then we are done
 	 */
 	if (offset == HALL_GPIO_OFFSET)
-		return;
+		return 0;
 
-	ret = regmap_update_bits(bdgpio->regmap, GPIO_OUT_REG(offset),
-				 BD71828_GPIO_OUT_MASK, val);
-	if (ret)
-		dev_err(bdgpio->dev, "Could not set gpio to %d\n", value);
+	return regmap_update_bits(bdgpio->regmap, GPIO_OUT_REG(offset),
+				  BD71828_GPIO_OUT_MASK, val);
 }
 
 static int bd71828_gpio_get(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int offset)
@@ -112,7 +109,7 @@  static int bd71828_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 	bdgpio->gpio.set_config = bd71828_gpio_set_config;
 	bdgpio->gpio.can_sleep = true;
 	bdgpio->gpio.get = bd71828_gpio_get;
-	bdgpio->gpio.set = bd71828_gpio_set;
+	bdgpio->gpio.set_rv = bd71828_gpio_set;
 	bdgpio->gpio.base = -1;
 
 	/*