Re: [PATCH 7/7] dt-bindings: pinctrl: qcom: correct gpio-ranges in examples

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 01/02/2023 17:31, Stephan Gerhold wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 01, 2023 at 05:07:40PM +0100, Stephan Gerhold wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 01, 2023 at 04:30:19PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> Correct the number of GPIOs in gpio-ranges to match reality.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> AFAICT the current gpio-ranges do match the number of GPIOs (ngpios) in
>> the pinctrl drivers for all/most of the platforms you update below. It
>> looks like the special UFS_RESET pins are also exported as GPIOs in
>> addition to the real GPIOs. I'm not sure if this is intended or a
>> mistake.
>>
> 
> It looks like this is on purpose:
> 
> ---
> From 53a5372ce326116f3e3d3f1d701113b2542509f4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 00:19:59 -0700
> Subject: [PATCH] pinctrl: qcom: sdm845: Expose ufs_reset as gpio
> 
> The ufs_reset pin is expected to be wired to the reset pin of the
> primary UFS memory but is pretty much just a general purpose output pinr
> 
> Reorder the pins and expose it as gpio 150, so that the UFS driver can
> toggle it.
> ---
> 
> And it's used in sdm845-mtp.dts:
> 
> &ufs_mem_hc {
> 	reset-gpios = <&tlmm 150 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>;
> };
> 
> So I think this patch (together with the DT ones you sent) should be
> dropped because it would prevent using the UFS_RESET as GPIO since it's
> no longer included in gpio-ranges.

Thanks, but then we need to fix few others which miss the UFS reset pin.

Best regards,
Krzysztof