linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv2] Input: omap4-keypad: Add pinctrl support

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 30 Oct 2012 23:57:41 +0100
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
	Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>,
	Felipe Balbi <balbi@...com>,
	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
	Benoit Cousson <b-cousson@...com>,
	Sourav Poddar <sourav.poddar@...com>, tony@...mide.com,
	linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] Input: omap4-keypad: Add pinctrl support

On Tuesday, October 30, 2012 10:51:11 PM Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 7:37 PM, Mark Brown
> <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com> wrote:
> 
> > More seriously the amount of time we seem to have been spending recently
> > on changes which end up requiring us to go through essentially every
> > driver and add code to them (often several times) doesn't seem like
> > we're doing a good job here.
> 
> If this is your main concern you should be made aware that there
> are people out there planning to supplant the existing DT probe paths
> that are now being added to each and every ARM-related driver
> with an ACPI probe path as ARM servers come into the picture.

That's correct.

> > pinctrl is really noticable because it's
> > new but it's not the only thing.  As a subsystem maintainer this code
> > just makes me want to add new subsystem features to pull the code out of
> > drivers but obviously that's not something that should be being done at
> > the subsystem level.
> 
> We did manage to drag the power/voltage domain per se out
> of the AMBA bus, and recommend that people (like us) do that
> business using the power domains.
> 
> I think most people (including OMAP) have bought
> into the concept of using the runtime PM framework and power
> domains to control the power domain switches.
> 
> It's this wider concept of using the loose concept "PM resource
> domains" to control also clocks and pins that is at stake, and so
> far the runtime PM core people (Rafael and Magnus) has not said
> much so I think we need some kind of indication from them as to
> what is to happen, long-term, with drivers handling their own clocks
> and pins. Should it be centralized or not? If it's to be centralized it
> needs to become a large piece of infrastructure refactoring and
> needs the attention of Linaro and the like to happen.

Well, I personally think it should be centralized somehow.  I'm not quite
sure how to achieve that, though.

Thanks,
Rafael


-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
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/