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=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_PASS autolearn=ham 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 1EAD7C2BC61 for ; Tue, 30 Oct 2018 12:08:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B21A320823 for ; Tue, 30 Oct 2018 12:08:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="MuzQVs7T" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org B21A320823 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linaro.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727956AbeJ3VBk (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Oct 2018 17:01:40 -0400 Received: from mail-lf1-f67.google.com ([209.85.167.67]:34341 "EHLO mail-lf1-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727834AbeJ3VBk (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Oct 2018 17:01:40 -0400 Received: by mail-lf1-f67.google.com with SMTP id n26-v6so8669045lfl.1 for ; Tue, 30 Oct 2018 05:08:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ikcapejhZs1NZVz+nd6VxP3ivNvG3HHZ13oWDtGHyD0=; b=MuzQVs7TLQXYLnlv5NK83Rwiud/j6ktYcTpRljzkYwYuFtd789l8uwxlsutoAq8Blo lKoaRr4x8QlnYuZsd24rc7OQcR/VrueBxGsUOcc5nrF1zqG6VdshbGg8E67kKDz/OlCn uvgyMzO8jAXTJb/IBXpVjTOjcVbSgqFj8jyOo= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ikcapejhZs1NZVz+nd6VxP3ivNvG3HHZ13oWDtGHyD0=; b=bcDRjvIfIDPFPCaJoRHxhkiH9C6pFnQlHRiOqYWZCvGk7hAAigOPn0KM+ceVrfMJIh Wx+eLZK1LPbH5sHwLT6jvuB6N5doKxwIk9zJ9D27UCkuFKtcCXkZEGK6IP9vsgiRd6PY +vAyLm78Erpwe80GAkrcKp6XFH2/0pnrRpgtGOq18jJ2WVUM8lq6tIK52CAja+oC1URH y3pAwnJ6zRYnH+Ns1BwaSULisYh9fW+GY2DEGVH8jxzYCiDoiTbsqIDVlVpbSKqKGjql d7G9G9RmtSluBC+AYwnienO0DAcao06zT78Rfb4BVzYlknPwSvSjjnx8hecfXAHEUSBu GzBQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gJdxbEPz1yE4ff43qtltBSSxxKucXQMJ2OG6zOwZuCYmmuLfyDW N/MIGWtIJO1NRSmeHXxdCHgPoUGq3FATvQnrFALO7w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5cqFmVpeTUU6Zx9FEHXAbX+H7xXPsQF2YCI9u9fDNjCLiPBz0LKYw/gQP709OxDvQHCwKxkedz6MaMolXCgFrY= X-Received: by 2002:a19:41c4:: with SMTP id o187mr1800325lfa.32.1540901305574; Tue, 30 Oct 2018 05:08:25 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20181017213012.233957-1-kunyi@google.com> <20181017213012.233957-3-kunyi@google.com> In-Reply-To: <20181017213012.233957-3-kunyi@google.com> From: Linus Walleij Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2018 13:08:14 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: pinctrl-npcm7xx: Set BGPIOF_VOLATILE_REG To: kunyi@google.com Cc: "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" , Tomer Maimon , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , avifishman70@gmail.com, OpenBMC Maillist , Mark Brown Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 11:30 PM Kun Yi wrote: > Indicate that the pins are both controlled by the pinctrl driver and the > generic GPIO driver, thus GPIO driver should read the register value > before updating, instead of using the stored shadow register values. > > Signed-off-by: Kun Yi This is quite a rough measure, if we instead use regmap-mmio we can exercise fine control over what register are volatile and not instead of saying that all of them or some of them are. Yours, Linus Walleij