From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964996AbcFMHWc (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Jun 2016 03:22:32 -0400 Received: from mail-oi0-f46.google.com ([209.85.218.46]:36571 "EHLO mail-oi0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964849AbcFMHW3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Jun 2016 03:22:29 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160609053204.32398-1-vigneshr@ti.com> References: <20160609053204.32398-1-vigneshr@ti.com> From: Linus Walleij Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 09:22:27 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio: pca953x: Fix NBANK calculation for PCA9536 To: Vignesh R Cc: Alexandre Courbot , "linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 7:32 AM, Vignesh R wrote: > NBANK() macro assumes that ngpios is a multiple of 8(BANK_SZ) and > hence results in 0 banks for PCA9536 which has just 4 gpios. This is > wrong as PCA9356 has 1 bank with 4 gpios. This results in uninitialized > PCA953X_INVERT register. Fix this by using DIV_ROUND_UP macro in > NBANK(). > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > Signed-off-by: Vignesh R Patch applied. Is this really a regression or affecting systems in development? Which machine/device tree makes this problematic? Yours, Linus Walleij