[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120427092949.GT9142@game.jcrosoft.org>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 11:29:49 +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 16:11 Fri 27 Apr , Shawn Guo wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 09:11:04AM +0200, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> > except duplicate bindings instead having common one make no sense either
> >
> > so imx, at91 and ST (STB SoC and other does have the same type of pin IP
> >
> > to not come with a common bindig means we are doint the same crap as before
> >
> > with switch to DT
> >
> It can be every different in hardware details from one pin based
> controller to another. mxs pinctrl is another pin based IP, and Dong
> tried to approach a binding working good for both imx and mxs, but in
> the end we agree imx binding does not work so good for mxs, and vice
> versa. And that's why pinctrl core binding design leaves out the
> platform specific binding.
agreed on the pin level configuration but not for the group management
there all the same
of simple group of pins
for this we must have a common way to describe it and handle it in c
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