Subject: [PATCH 04/22] ASoC: Ux500: Move MSP pinctrl setup into the MSP driver

From: [email-masked] (Lee Jones)
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 09:09:46 +0100

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 10:51:02AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 5:47 PM, Lee Jones <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> > In the initial submission of the MSP driver msp1 and msp3's associated
> > pinctrl mechanism was passed back to platform code using a plat_init()
> > call-back routine, but it has no place in platform code. The MSP driver
> > should set this up for the appropriate ports. Instead we use a use_pinctrl
> > identifier which is passed from platform_data/Device Tree which indicates
> > which ports should use pinctrl.
> >
> > CC: alsa-devel at alsa-project.org
> > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <[email-masked]>
> 
> This is very good because it rids platform code and makes the driver
> self-contained without strange platform data hooks.
> 
> Now details...
> 
> > +/* MSP1/3 Tx/Rx usage protection */
> > +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(msp_rxtx_lock);
> > +
> > +/* Pin modes */
> > +struct pinctrl *pinctrl_p;
> > +struct pinctrl_state *pinctrl_def;
> > +struct pinctrl_state *pinctrl_sleep;
> > +
> > +/* Reference Count */
> > +int pinctrl_rxtx_ref;
> 
> 
> But wait. These are just local statics. Surelty you can put these into
> struct ux500_msp instead? Here it looks like these will be used for
> all ports, so MSP2 will enable the pins requested by MSP1 etc
> completely broken. So put it into the struct ux500_msp state
> container from ux500_msp_i2s.h where it belongs.

This was intentional, as in the previous implementation only MSP1 and
MSP3 (which share pins) were enabled for pinctrl. I will move them into
struct ux500_msp instead though, no problem

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog