[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 13:52:43 +0100
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...ricsson.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] pinctrl: Don't create a device for each pin controller
On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 12:59 AM, Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com> wrote:
> Pin controllers should already be instantiated as a device, so there's
> no need for the pinctrl core to create a new struct device for each
> controller.
>
> This allows the controller's real name to be used in the mux mapping
> table, rather than e.g. "pinctrl.0", "pinctrl.1", etc.
Hey cool, this "just works" on U300!
And it is what we want for future device tree work I highly suspect.
I'll push the change to linux-next!
Thanks,
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists