[PATCH v2 4/5] pinctrl: qcom: Add support for driving GPIO pins output
Sumit Garg
sumit.garg at linaro.org
Tue Mar 12 09:12:14 CET 2024
On Mon, 11 Mar 2024 at 18:07, Caleb Connolly <caleb.connolly at linaro.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Sumit,
>
> On 11/03/2024 11:10, Sumit Garg wrote:
> > Add support for driving the GPIO pins as output low or high.
>
> Ohh, this is why it was never working for me >,<
Yeah you only implemented it for PMIC GPIOs.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sumit Garg <sumit.garg at linaro.org>
> > ---
> > drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-apq8016.c | 1 +
> > drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-qcom.c | 26 +++++++++++++++++++++-----
> > 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-apq8016.c b/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-apq8016.c
> > index cb0e2227079..04b501c563d 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-apq8016.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-apq8016.c
> > @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@ static const char * const msm_pinctrl_pins[] = {
> > };
> >
> > static const struct pinctrl_function msm_pinctrl_functions[] = {
> > + {"gpio", 0},
> Please split this into a separate patch.
Okay I can do that.
> > {"blsp_uart1", 2},
> > {"blsp_uart2", 2},
> > };
> > diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-qcom.c b/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-qcom.c
> > index ee0624df296..932be7c4840 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-qcom.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-qcom.c
> > @@ -29,15 +29,25 @@ struct msm_pinctrl_priv {
> > #define GPIO_CONFIG_REG(priv, x) \
> > (qcom_pin_offset((priv)->data->pin_data.pin_offsets, x))
> >
> > -#define TLMM_GPIO_PULL_MASK GENMASK(1, 0)
> > -#define TLMM_FUNC_SEL_MASK GENMASK(5, 2)
> > -#define TLMM_DRV_STRENGTH_MASK GENMASK(8, 6)
> > -#define TLMM_GPIO_DISABLE BIT(9)
> > +#define GPIO_IN_OUT_REG(priv, x) \
> > + (GPIO_CONFIG_REG(priv, x) + 0x4)
> > +
> > +#define TLMM_GPIO_PULL_MASK GENMASK(1, 0)
> > +#define TLMM_FUNC_SEL_MASK GENMASK(5, 2)
> > +#define TLMM_DRV_STRENGTH_MASK GENMASK(8, 6)
> > +#define TLMM_GPIO_OUTPUT_MASK BIT(1)
> > +#define TLMM_GPIO_OE_MASK BIT(9)
> > +
> > +/* GPIO_IN_OUT register shifts. */
> > +#define GPIO_IN 0
> > +#define GPIO_OUT 1
> Are there two separate bits?
Yeah these are two separate bits. I can rename them as GPIO_IN_SHIFT
and GPIO_OUT_SHIFT if that is more clear.
> GPIO_IN is never used?
Okay I can drop it as it is very unlikely for the pinctrl driver to
read GPIO value.
> Maybe just define
> GPIO_OUT as BIT(0) instead?
> >
> > static const struct pinconf_param msm_conf_params[] = {
> > { "drive-strength", PIN_CONFIG_DRIVE_STRENGTH, 2 },
> > { "bias-disable", PIN_CONFIG_BIAS_DISABLE, 0 },
> > { "bias-pull-up", PIN_CONFIG_BIAS_PULL_UP, 3 },
> > + { "output-high", PIN_CONFIG_OUTPUT, 1, },
> > + { "output-low", PIN_CONFIG_OUTPUT, 0, },
> > };
> >
> > static int msm_get_functions_count(struct udevice *dev)
> > @@ -89,7 +99,7 @@ static int msm_pinmux_set(struct udevice *dev, unsigned int pin_selector,
> > return 0;
> >
> > clrsetbits_le32(priv->base + GPIO_CONFIG_REG(priv, pin_selector),
> > - TLMM_FUNC_SEL_MASK | TLMM_GPIO_DISABLE,
> > + TLMM_FUNC_SEL_MASK | TLMM_GPIO_OE_MASK,
> > priv->data->get_function_mux(func_selector) << 2);
> > return 0;
> > }
> > @@ -117,6 +127,12 @@ static int msm_pinconf_set(struct udevice *dev, unsigned int pin_selector,
> > clrsetbits_le32(priv->base + GPIO_CONFIG_REG(priv, pin_selector),
> > TLMM_GPIO_PULL_MASK, argument);
> > break;
> > + case PIN_CONFIG_OUTPUT:
> > + writel(argument << GPIO_OUT,
> Then this can be "argument ? GPIO_OUT : GPIO_IN" which feels much
> cleaner. Or even just !!argument if it's bit 0.
No, here GPIO_OUT is rather a shift for the output bit and "argument"
is the value to be written. As above I can change it to "argument <<
GPIO_OUT_SHIFT" to be more clear.
-Sumit
> > + priv->base + GPIO_IN_OUT_REG(priv, pin_selector));
> > + setbits_le32(priv->base + GPIO_CONFIG_REG(priv, pin_selector),
> > + TLMM_GPIO_OE_MASK);
> > + break;
> > default:
> > return 0;
> > }
>
> --
> // Caleb (they/them)
More information about the U-Boot
mailing list