linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] pinctrl: imx: add pinmux-imx53 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]

Message-ID: <CACRpkdY43PuU50nZxd4TMqj5T+4ZOGXOhOsOKOKNQ-wA_qUgaA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 7 Dec 2011 10:01:13 +0100
From:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:	Lothar Waßmann <LW@...o-electronics.de>,
	Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...escale.com>,
	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>
Cc:	linus.walleij@...ricsson.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	kernel@...gutronix.de, Dong Aisheng <b29396@...escale.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] pinctrl: imx: add pinmux-imx53 support

On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Lothar Waßmann <LW@...o-electronics.de> wrote:
> Shawn Guo writes:
>> On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 10:18:38PM +0100, Sascha Hauer wrote:

>> > This brings me to the point that currently we have the pins described as
>> >
>> > #define MX53_PAD_<name>__<function>
>> >
>> But that's also the reason why we have so many lengthy iomux-mx*.h on
>> imx.  Taking iomux-mx53.h for example, it's a 109K header with 1219
>> LOC, but probably only 10% of the definitions will actually be used.
>>
> Which has the benefit of having correct pin definitions for everyone
> to use. If developers who need to use currently unused pindefs have to
> create them on their own, there will always be a good chance in
> getting them wrong.
>
>> > which means that you don't have to look into the datasheet to get the
>> > different options for a pin
>>
>> Looking at the datasheet when we write code is a pretty natural thing
>> to me.
>>
> The pindefs are like interrupt numbers or IO addresses for which there
> also is a complete list of definitions in the kernel no matter whether
> they are actually all in use.

In both cases I'd say it's not the business of the pin control
implementation to worry about size of .h files in arch/arm/*

Getting rid of such defines and board data is the business of the
device tree and nothing else, if I understand the way people are
thinking about this.

So I would prefer to keep these two concepts separate:
1) get something in place that integrates nicely with pinctrl
2) get device tree in place
3) get rid of old board files and huge .h define lists including
   I/O, irqs, pinmux lists...
4) ...
5) profit

So don't try to solve all things at once or you'll end up trying
to drink the ocean.

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/