Am 02.05.2018 um 14:29 schrieb Andy Shevchenko andy.shevchenko@gmail.com:
On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 7:31 PM, H. Nikolaus Schaller hns@goldelico.com wrote:
These mask bits are to be used to map the extended register addreseses (which are defined for an unsupported 8-bit pcal chip) to 16 and 24 bit chips (pcal6524).
Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller hns@goldelico.com
drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c index 2b667166e855..fc863faa3ce4 100644 --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c @@ -56,6 +56,9 @@ #define PCAL6524_DEBOUNCE 0x2d
#define PCA_GPIO_MASK 0x00FF
- empty line (the above is about contents, not addresses)
ok.
+#define PCAL_GPIO_MASK GENMASK(4, 0) +#define PCAL_PINCTRL_MASK (~PCAL_GPIO_MASK)
I'm not sure which would be better here
- to follow existing style
0x1F 0xE0
I have also thought about this.
to use GENMASK() in both definitions
as it in this patch.
Whatever Linus prefers.
Ok, waiting for his suggestion.
#define PCA_INT 0x0100 #define PCA_PCAL 0x0200
#define PCA_LATCH_INT (PCA_PCAL | PCA_INT)
2.12.2
BR and thanks, Nikolaus