linux-kernel - RE: Pinmux bindings proposal V2

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:	Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:36:08 -0800
From:	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>
To:	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
CC:	"Shawn Guo (shawn.guo@...aro.org)" <shawn.guo@...aro.org>,
	Dong Aisheng <dongas86@...il.com>,
	"devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org" 
	<devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
	"Linus Walleij (linus.walleij@...aro.org)" <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"rob.herring@...xeda.com" <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	"Grant Likely (grant.likely@...retlab.ca)" 
	<grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	Thomas Abraham <thomas.abraham@...aro.org>,
	"kernel@...gutronix.de" <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
	"Simon Glass (sjg@...omium.org)" <sjg@...omium.org>,
	"cjb@...top.org" <cjb@...top.org>,
	Dong Aisheng-B29396 <B29396@...escale.com>,
	"Sascha Hauer (s.hauer@...gutronix.de)" <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: RE: Pinmux bindings proposal V2

Tony Lindgren wrote at Thursday, January 26, 2012 7:09 PM:
...
> I don't think we should try to pass the different possible states from
> device tree. The pinmux/pinconf driver should know how to deal with that,

Somehow, the pinctrl driver needs to know how to implement each state. In 
general, I believe this will be board-specific.

Do you disagree with this assertion?

If the data is board-specific, I don't see how it can be represented
anywhere but the device tree.

> and the driver using the mux should be able to communicate what it wants
> to the pinmux/pinconf driver. If people really want to be able to pass
> alternative mux states from device tree, they should be standard bindings
> for things like active/idle/suspend/off.

As I've mentioned before, people have asked for driver-specific states to
handle the case where e.g. drive strength must be adjusted based on clock
rates of the interface. Again, I believe that's board-specific data since
the actual values to use may be derived during board calibration, not
SoC design.

Do you disagree that this data may be board specific?

--
nvpublic

--
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/