Subject: [PATCH 4/7] pinctrl: sh-pfc: Stop calling gpiochip_add_pin_range() on DT platforms

From: [email-masked] (Laurent Pinchart)
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 12:54:26 +0300

Hi Geert,

On Tuesday 30 June 2015 11:44:24 Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 11:30 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > On Tuesday 30 June 2015 09:45:24 Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >> On platforms where the PFC/GPIO controller is instantiated from DT, the
> >> mapping between GPIOs and pins is set up using the "gpio-ranges"
> >> property in DT.
> >> 
> >> Hence stop setting up the mapping from C code on DT platforms.
> >> This code is still used for SH or ARM-legacy platforms.
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <[email-masked]>
> >> ---
> >> 
> >>  drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/gpio.c | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++----------------
> >>  1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> >> 
> >> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/gpio.c
> >> b/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/gpio.c
> >> index ba353735ecf2be9a..1be118e4865fd3f8 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/gpio.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/gpio.c
> >> @@ -379,22 +379,26 @@ int sh_pfc_register_gpiochip(struct sh_pfc *pfc)
> >> 
> >>       pfc->gpio = chip;
> >> 
> >> -     /* Register the GPIO to pin mappings. As pins with GPIO ports must
> >> come
> >> -      * first in the ranges, skip the pins without GPIO ports by
> >> stopping at
> >> -      * the first range that contains such a pin.
> >> -      */
> >> -     for (i = 0; i < pfc->nr_ranges; ++i) {
> >> -             const struct sh_pfc_pin_range *range = &pfc->ranges[i];
> >> -
> >> -             if (range->start >= pfc->nr_gpio_pins)
> >> -                     break;
> >> -
> >> -             ret = gpiochip_add_pin_range(&chip->gpio_chip,
> >> -                                          dev_name(pfc->dev),
> >> -                                          range->start, range->start,
> >> -                                          range->end - range->start +
> >> 1);
> >> -             if (ret < 0)
> >> -                     return ret;
> >> +     if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SUPERH) ||
> >> +         IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARCH_SHMOBILE_LEGACY)) {
> > 
> > I'd prefer checking IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF) && pfc->dev->of_node as that
> > doesn't explicitly depend on the platform type.
> 
> Note that CONFIG_OF is also set for ARM-legacy (and soon for SH). But that's
> a minor problem. But due to the runtime check on pfc->dev->of_node, the
> unused code below won't be left out by the compiler, and I want to get rid
> of that code.
> 
> The platform check make it clear when the code can be removed.

Not any time soon I'm afraid as arch/sh won't fully move to DT in the near 
future, but ARCH_SHMOBILE_LEGACY should go away soon, so I'm fine with 
compile-time optimization.

> > As the code after this if block also don't need to run on non-DT
> > platforms,
> > how about just using
> > 
> >         if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF) && pfc->dev->of_node)
> >         
> >                 return 0;
> > 
> > ?
> 
> Early return is indeed an option, as we don't need the function GPIOs on
> DT platforms.

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart