lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 10:32:11 +0800 From: Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...aro.org> To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org> Cc: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>, "linus.walleij@...ricsson.com" <linus.walleij@...ricsson.com>, "s.hauer@...gutronix.de" <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "rob.herring@...xeda.com" <rob.herring@...xeda.com>, Richard Zhao <richard.zhao@...aro.org>, "kernel@...gutronix.de" <kernel@...gutronix.de>, "cjb@...top.org" <cjb@...top.org>, "devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org" <devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org>, "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, Dong Aisheng <dongas86@...il.com> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 2/5] pinctrl: add dt binding support for pinmux mappings On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 05:08:57PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: ... > As you can see none of the text above claims that the group is > about hardware-defined groups or anything like that. The groups > are just that - a group of pins, an abstract concept of a group. Ok, the thing gets clarified. The concept of group is a abstract at software level. It does not necessarily require a pin group defined by raw hardware underneath, which is basically my argument. > It could be drawn i UML even... maybe I'll do that for my > ELC presentation :-) > > Then when we come to pinmux, which is slightly different > involving the definitions of a function and mappings between > functions and one or more pin groups as per above, which is > something completely different and seems to be what you're > discussing here? > > For hardware that does handle pins in groups there are > special functions that can be used in the drivers like > configuring a whole group (which falls back to iterating > over pins if there is no such callback, showing again that > this is a theoretical concept) so if the hardware handles > pins in groups its a good idea to match group definitions > 1-to-1 with these, but for hardware that doesn't there is > some freedom of how to use the groups. > > I don't know if this helps though the discussion here seems > a bit contended :-/ > It does help to me. Thanks, Linus. -- Regards, Shawn -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists