From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7993AC433DB for ; Tue, 2 Mar 2021 22:37:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E1CD64F35 for ; Tue, 2 Mar 2021 22:37:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2359739AbhCBWDA (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Mar 2021 17:03:00 -0500 Received: from ssl.serverraum.org ([176.9.125.105]:56911 "EHLO ssl.serverraum.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1576788AbhCBT1O (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Mar 2021 14:27:14 -0500 Received: from ssl.serverraum.org (web.serverraum.org [172.16.0.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ssl.serverraum.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4D7412223E; Tue, 2 Mar 2021 20:24:38 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=walle.cc; s=mail2016061301; t=1614713078; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=6eEV6lINxDy3bnV6PBJ9hbLC1cOGc3ZDkPwme/58AuM=; b=a4yWeqGCGS93HcgESPkmrCHKOH9jPDOyb/hRL9lBOmoC65Z8awsbWfxEPXgMQ/yFN/15Q9 sTN2iFHaLXpGtflJb6IsBZaJofSinwusHrTiICRzLOuMoisZ57EhKslpWlBzjnlqsykBMo 3kdbVoP6IGOxWaAGryo/tYN1/bqyp5E= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2021 20:24:38 +0100 From: Michael Walle To: =?UTF-8?Q?=C3=81lvaro_Fern=C3=A1ndez_Rojas?= Cc: Linus Walleij , Bartosz Golaszewski , Andy Shevchenko , linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio: regmap: move struct gpio_regmap definition In-Reply-To: <4af4b519-84eb-3cb4-bb0e-9c5ac6204348@gmail.com> References: <20210302180601.12082-1-noltari@gmail.com> <4af4b519-84eb-3cb4-bb0e-9c5ac6204348@gmail.com> User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.4.11 Message-ID: <8f703cfde0245a280340f2c9c8a5359a@walle.cc> X-Sender: michael@walle.cc Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, Am 2021-03-02 19:14, schrieb Álvaro Fernández Rojas: > El 02/03/2021 a las 19:10, Michael Walle escribió: >> Am 2021-03-02 19:06, schrieb Álvaro Fernández Rojas: >>> struct gpio_regmap should be declared in gpio/regmap.h. >>> This way other drivers can access the structure data when registering >>> a gpio >>> regmap controller. >> >> The intention was really to keep this private to the gpio-regmap >> driver. Why do you need to access to the properties? > > I'm trying to add support for bcm63xx pin controllers, and Linus > suggested that I could use gpio regmap instead of adding duplicated > code. nice! > However, I need to access gpio_chip inside gpio_regmap to call > pinctrl_add_gpio_range() with gpio_chip.base. Can't we add something to gpio-regmap.c which will (1) either call pinctrl_add_gpio_range(), just (2) return the struct gpio_chip* or (3) even only gpio_chip.base? I don't know how many sense (1) make and how reusable that code would be for other drivers, though. Linus? -michael