acpi_find_gpio with absent GPIOs
Hi,
I'm currently trying to use rfkill-gpio with a device that has just a single GPIO assigned by ACPI. rfkill-gpio calls acpi_dev_add_driver_gpios to assign names to the ACPI GPIOs and then uses devm_gpiod_get_optional to request both of them. The problem is that on the second call to devm_gpiod_get_optional acpi_find_gpio falls back to using the GPIO index 0 (from gpiod_get) in _CRS, which leads to the same GPIO being returned as in the first call. Probing the driver then fails with -EBUSY.
In my opinion it is a bad idea to fall back to indexing the _CRS if the con_id was found in the _DSD or the GPIOs added by acpi_dev_add_driver_gpios, but I don't know if there are drivers relying on this behavior.
Luckily acpi_get_gpiod_by_index returns -ENODATA if the name can't be found and -ENOENT if the GPIO is absent, so we can distinguish the two cases. -EPROBE_DEFER also should not make acpi_find_gpio try to use another GPIO from the _CRS.
There is also the possibility that the GPIO index exceeds the size of the package found in _DSD or added with acpi_dev_add_driver_gpios. The former will return -EPROTO, the latter will forward the error from acpi_dev_get_property_reference (usually -ENODATA). of_find_gpio returns -ENOENT in this case.
So, what of this should be fixed?
Best regards,
Daniel
Signature · 11 lines
Dipl.-Math. Daniel Glöckner, emlix GmbH, http://www.emlix.com Fon +49 551 30664-0, Fax +49 551 30664-11, Bertha-von-Suttner-Straße 9, 37085 Göttingen, Germany Sitz der Gesellschaft: Göttingen, Amtsgericht Göttingen HR B 3160 Geschäftsführer: Dr. Uwe Kracke, Ust-IdNr.: DE 205 198 055 emlix - your embedded linux partner -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Quoted 10 lines · Daniel Glöckner
Hi,
I'm currently trying to use rfkill-gpio with a device that has just a single GPIO assigned by ACPI. rfkill-gpio calls
acpi_dev_add_driver_gpiosto assign names to the ACPI GPIOs and then usesdevm_gpiod_get_optionalto request both of them. The problem is that on the second call todevm_gpiod_get_optionalacpi_find_gpiofalls back to using the GPIO index 0 (fromgpiod_get) in_CRS, which leads to the same GPIO being returned as in the first call. Probing the driver then fails with-EBUSY.
Quoted 4 lines
In my opinion it is a bad idea to fall back to indexing the
_CRSif thecon_idwas found in the_DSDor the GPIOs added byacpi_dev_add_driver_gpios, but I don't know if there are drivers relying on this behavior.
I agree it is bad idea and I think this is actually a bug in the implementation rather than wanted behavior. No drivers should rely on that anyway.
Quoted 5 lines
Luckily
acpi_get_gpiod_by_indexreturns-ENODATAif the name can't be found and-ENOENTif the GPIO is absent, so we can distinguish the two cases. -EPROBE_DEFER also should not makeacpi_find_gpiotry to use another GPIO from the_CRS.
Quoted 7 lines
There is also the possibility that the GPIO index exceeds the size of the package found in
_DSDor added withacpi_dev_add_driver_gpios. The former will return-EPROTO, the latter will forward the error fromacpi_dev_get_property_reference(usually-ENODATA).of_find_gpioreturns-ENOENTin this case.So, what of this should be fixed?
I think both should be fixed.
For the first maybe something like below?
drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c +5 -0
@@ -1765,6 +1765,11 @@ static struct gpio_desc *acpi_find_gpio(struct device *dev, const char *con_id,/* Then from plain _CRS GPIOs */ if (IS_ERR (desc)) { +/* Only fallback if the device has no properties at all */ +if (PTR_ERR (desc) == -ENODATA && + (adev->data.properties || adev->driver_gpios)) +return ERR_PTR (-ENOENT ); + desc =acpi_get_gpiod_by_index (adev,NULL , idx, &info);if (IS_ERR (desc))return desc;
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html