From: Marek Vasut <marex@nabladev.com>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Srinivas Kandagatla <srini@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nvmem: core: Mark nWP GPIO as non-exclusive
Date: Mon, 18 May 2026 21:22:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49b658d0-6a03-44a0-ae57-1ccad8094486@nabladev.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMRc=Mdqxen+8rd-5yR+_cvtFkM=qeAG78uqG+ZHWR3CQsa1Ow@mail.gmail.com>
On 5/12/26 12:04 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Mon, May 11, 2026 at 6:35 PM Marek Vasut <marex@nabladev.com> wrote:
>>
>> Mark the nWP GPIO as non-exclusive, because there is hardware in the
>> field which has multiple AT24 EEPROMs with nWP GPIO line tied to a
>> single GPIO. This allows such hardware to be described in DT and the
>> nWP GPIO operated via NVMEM force_ro sysfs attribute.
>>
>> Note that GPIOD_FLAGS_BIT_NONEXCLUSIVE is a deprecated flag and should
>> not be used, but thus far there seems to be no replacement.
>>
>
> There is a replacement now. It lives under
> drivers/gpio/gpiolib-shared.c and drivers/gpio/gpio-shared-proxy.c.
> Though the voting mechanism I implemented is hard-coded to drive the
> line high if there's at least one consumer sharing the line that votes
> high. I'm now thinking that this may be too rigid as yesterday, within
> two hours I had two submissions wanting to do it the other way around
> - drive the line low if there's at least one consumer that wants it
> low.
>
> I'll try to modify the gpio-shared-proxy driver to take into account
> the value set when the line is first requested and treat it as the
> "default" in the voting mechanism. IOW: when the first user requests
> it out-high, we'll drive it low on the first user that votes for low
> and drive it high again when the last user drivers it high. This
> should work for both the Qualcomm shared GPIOs for audio use-cases and
> the WP pin here as well as the SCL recovery shared GPIO we have in
> I2C.
Shouldn't the polarity inversion be handled by DT GPIO_ACTIVE_* flags
instead ?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-19 3:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-11 16:35 Marek Vasut
2026-05-12 10:04 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2026-05-18 19:22 ` Marek Vasut [this message]
2026-07-23 19:35 ` Marek Vasut
2026-07-24 7:30 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2026-07-24 12:51 ` Marek Vasut
2026-07-27 13:10 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2026-07-27 13:24 ` Marek Vasut
2026-07-28 8:32 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2026-07-28 11:21 ` Marek Vasut
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=49b658d0-6a03-44a0-ae57-1ccad8094486@nabladev.com \
--to=marex@nabladev.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=brgl@kernel.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=srini@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®