linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] Pinmux subsystem

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <BANLkTi=O_mZEqMhOS_Fz0vAYCQ-XpyG4UA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 15 May 2011 19:50:26 +0200
From:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:	Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	Martin Persson <martin.persson@...ricsson.com>,
	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Pinmux subsystem

2011/5/15 Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>:

> With a bit of scripting, came to the following results. Each line is
> on pinmux function description what would be needed in the driver. The
> number at the front says how many boards would use it. In total there
> are 33 descriptions needed. Of these, 18 are used only once. This to
> me suggests the board needs to be able to specify a pin description
> when there is no reuse with other boards.

As indicated elsewhere in this thread, a pinmux driver can pass in
platform/package/board/system data just like any other platform
driver in the kernel tree can.

You will have to specify it somehow in a custom header file, just
like with any other platform driver.

Example from:
arch/arm/mach-orion5x/ls-chl-setup.c:

static struct gpio_led lschl_led_pins[] = {
        {
                .name = "alarm:red",
                .gpio = LSCHL_GPIO_LED_ALARM,
                .active_low = 1,
        }, {
                .name = "info:amber",
                .gpio = LSCHL_GPIO_LED_INFO,
                .active_low = 1,
        }, {
                .name = "func:blue:top",
                .gpio = LSCHL_GPIO_LED_FUNC,
                .active_low = 1,
        }, {
                .name = "power:blue:bottom",
                .gpio = LSCHL_GPIO_LED_PWR,
        },
};

static struct gpio_led_platform_data lschl_led_data = {
        .leds = lschl_led_pins,
        .num_leds = ARRAY_SIZE(lschl_led_pins),
};

static struct platform_device lschl_leds = {
        .name = "leds-gpio",
        .id = -1,
        .dev = {
                .platform_data = &lschl_led_data,
        },
};

Still, the driver for these LEDs is in
drivers/leds/leds-gpio.c and the above structure is
described in include/linux/leds.h

There is no difference between this and letting
drivers/pinmux/pinmux-orion.c have a header file in
include/linux/pinmux/orion.h and pass in necessary board
data that way.

Are we now in agreement that this will work just fine?

Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
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/