From: swarren@wwwdotorg•org (Stephen Warren)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists•infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 5/9] document: devicetree: bind pinconf with pin-single
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 16:26:50 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5091A5AA.7000207@wwwdotorg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAN1soZy8xXGs8zEiZV0kV0dGVdXfZ9ogx83sFgPG76d0i8yH4A@mail.gmail.com>
On 10/31/2012 10:58 AM, Haojian Zhuang wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 6:44 AM, Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg•org> wrote:
>> On 10/22/2012 10:08 AM, Haojian Zhuang wrote:
>>> Add comments with pinconf & gpio range in the document of
>>> pinctrl-single.
...
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.txt
...
>>> @@ -17,6 +17,36 @@ Optional properties:
>>> - pinctrl-single,bit-per-mux : boolean to indicate that one register controls
>>> more than one pin
>>>
>>> +- pinctrl-single,gpio-ranges : gpio range list
>>> +
>>> +- pinctrl-single,gpio : array with gpio range start, size & register
>>> + offset
>>> +
>>> +- pinctrl-single,gpio-func : gpio function value in the pinmux register
...
>> 2) pinctrl-single,gpio is listed as optional. Presumably it's not; every
>> GPIO range node must have this property?
>>
> Yes, they must be included in GPIO range node. But if GPIO feature
> isn't supported in the pinctrl device, pinctrl-single,gpio is still optional.
> I'll add more comments on this.
>
>> 3) Why is pinctrl-single,gpio-func optional? Presumably you always need
>> to program the pinmux HW to select the GPIO function. Yet, the driver
>> code in an earlier patch seems to deliberately do nothing if this
>> property is missing. Shouldn't the DT parsing return an error instead?
>>
> pinctrl-single,gpio-func is optional for above reason.
Presumably the node that contains the pinctrl-single,gpio-func property
is optional, but once you have such a node, pinctrl-single,gpio-func is
required?
>>> +- pinctrl-single,power-source-mask : mask of setting power source in
>>> + the pinmux register
>>> +
>>> +- pinctrl-single,power-source : value of setting power source field
>>> + in the pinmux register
...
>> I suppose it's OK that a generic pin controller binding would use the
>> generic pin configuration config options. I'm still not convinced that
>> the semantics of generic pin control make sense. Maybe if they're just
>> arbitrary names for SoC-specific things it's fine though.
>>
>> Do these patches expose /all/ generic pin configuration options? It
>> doesn't seem worth exposing only some of them and ignoring others.
>
> I believe general pinconf can't support all cases in different silicons.
I tend to agree.
> And we still have some common features that could be covered in general
> pinconf. So we need a structure to support both pinconf & specific pinconf.
But that tends to imply that adding support for generic pinconf into the
pinctrl-simple driver isnt' actually going to be useful for anyone. If
pinctrl-single only supports some part of your HW, how can you use it?
Or, do you intend to somehow make pinctrl-single support both the common
generic pinconf stuff, and somehow be extensible to support any
SoC-specific pin config fields?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-31 22:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-22 16:08 [PATCH v2 0/9] support pinctrl single in arch pxa/mmp Haojian Zhuang
2012-10-22 16:08 ` [PATCH v2 1/9] ARM: mmp: select pinctrl driver Haojian Zhuang
2012-10-23 10:05 ` Linus Walleij
2012-10-22 16:08 ` [PATCH v2 2/9] pinctrl: single: support gpio request and free Haojian Zhuang
2012-10-22 20:28 ` Tony Lindgren
2012-10-22 21:37 ` Tony Lindgren
2012-10-29 1:55 ` Haojian Zhuang
2012-10-29 1:58 ` Haojian Zhuang
2012-10-22 16:08 ` [PATCH v2 3/9] pinctrl: single: support pinconf generic Haojian Zhuang
2012-10-22 16:08 ` [PATCH v2 4/9] ARM: dts: support pinctrl single in pxa910 Haojian Zhuang
2012-10-22 16:08 ` [PATCH v2 5/9] document: devicetree: bind pinconf with pin-single Haojian Zhuang
2012-10-22 22:44 ` Stephen Warren
2012-10-31 16:58 ` Haojian Zhuang
2012-10-31 22:26 ` Stephen Warren [this message]
2012-10-31 22:51 ` Haojian Zhuang
2012-11-01 0:25 ` Tony Lindgren
2012-10-22 16:08 ` [PATCH v2 6/9] tty: pxa: configure pin Haojian Zhuang
2012-10-23 10:07 ` Linus Walleij
2012-10-22 16:08 ` [PATCH v2 7/9] i2c: pxa: use devm_kzalloc Haojian Zhuang
2012-10-22 16:08 ` [PATCH v2 8/9] i2c: pxa: configure pinmux Haojian Zhuang
2012-10-23 10:07 ` Linus Walleij
2012-10-22 16:08 ` [PATCH v2 9/9] pinctrl: single: dump pinmux register value Haojian Zhuang
2012-10-22 22:27 ` Tony Lindgren
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5091A5AA.7000207@wwwdotorg.org \
--to=swarren@wwwdotorg$(echo .)org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists$(echo .)infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox