Re: [PATCH 4/4] drivers: Add pinctrl handling for dynamic pin states

[Stephen Warren]

On 07/16/2013 03:05 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> We want to have static pin states handled separately from
> dynamic pin states, so let's add optional state_active.
> 
> Then if state_active is defined, let's check and make sure
> state_idle and state_sleep match state_active for the
> pin groups to avoid checking them during runtime as the
> active and idle pins may need to be toggled for many
> devices every time we enter and exit idle.

> +	 * Note that if active state is defined, sleep and idle states must
> +	 * cover the same pin groups as active state.
>  	 */
>  	dev->pins->sleep_state = pinctrl_lookup_state(dev->pins->p,
>  					PINCTRL_STATE_SLEEP);
> -	if (IS_ERR(dev->pins->sleep_state))
> +	if (IS_ERR(dev->pins->sleep_state)) {
>  		/* Not supplying this state is perfectly legal */
>  		dev_dbg(dev, "no sleep pinctrl state\n");
> +	} else if (!IS_ERR(dev->pins->active_state)) {
> +		ret = pinctrl_check_dynamic(dev, dev->pins->active_state,
> +					    dev->pins->sleep_state);

Oh, I see you're trying to check that the set of pins in the active,
sleep, and idle states are identical.

But I think that pinctrl_check_dynamic() only checks that one state is a
subset of the other, not that the two states are equal. Instead, I think
you want to comparison coded in pinctrl_check_dynamic() to be:

gen_group_list_of_pinctrl_state(s1, array1);
gen_group_list_of_pinctrl_state(s2, array2);
mismatch = memcmp(array1, array2, length);
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/