[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120427062816.GQ9142@game.jcrosoft.org>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 08:28:16 +0200
From: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@...osoft.com>
To: Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...aro.org>
Cc: Dong Aisheng <b29396@...escale.com>, b20223@...escale.com,
linus.walleij@...ricsson.com, devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rob.herring@...xeda.com,
kernel@...gutronix.de, cjb@...top.org, s.hauer@...gutronix.de,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] pinctrl: pinctrl-imx: add imx pinctrl core
driver
On 13:48 Fri 27 Apr , Shawn Guo wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 05:15:36PM +0200, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> > We have on Imx mxc at91 and other SoC controler hich you configure per pin
> >
> > which means one pin have multiple function and the same function is on
> > multiple pins
> >
> > so the groups are just a list of possible pins
> >
> > Instead of re-inventing bindings we do need to come with a common binding whre
> > it's possible
> >
> > So instead I proppose (send in the v2) to use common way to describe the group
> >
> Let's see how many nodes we will have in device tree. For imx6q
> example, there are 332 pins and each pin has up to 8 function selects.
> We will end up with having 332 x 8 = 2656 sub nodes under node
> "functions". Device tree simply cannot afford such a bloating.
device tree can offord it
except you are going to have hundereds of duplicated pinctrl configuration
as different board will have different mux which is impossbile to maintain
either
and I do not expect we add all the configuration possible but just the common
one
Best Regards,
J.
--
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