linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: Add generic pinctrl-simple driver that supports omap2+ padconf

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: <20120504150342.GI5140@atomide.com>
Date:	Fri, 4 May 2012 08:03:42 -0700
From:	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
To:	Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@...osoft.com>
Cc:	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: Add generic pinctrl-simple driver that
 supports omap2+ padconf

* Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@...osoft.com> [120503 22:08]:
> 
> In my mind in the driver we do not have to care how to list
> register/unregister the group. We just need to be able to do this
> 
> pinctrl_register_group(...)
> 
> or 
> 
> pinctrl_unregistewr_group(...)
> 
> On at91 we have this type of controller

Ah I see. Yeah makes sense. Also I think we should let the pinctrl
core eventually manage the pins more too. Right now the pins are
a static array in the driver, which makes things unnecessarily
complex for the DT case. It would be nice to also have something like
pinctrl_register/unregister_pin instead of requiring them all
be registered while registering with the framework initially.

But all that can be improved later on once we get the binding down..

> one pin can have multiple function and each function can be on different pin
> and we need to program and represent each of them one by one
> 
> And each pin have different parameter
> 
> so I was thinking to do like on gpio
> 
> uart {
> 	pin = < &pioA 12 {pararms} >
> 
> }

Hmm I assume the "12" above the gpio number?

> and use macro as basicaly we are just this
> 
> and this can be applied to tegra too as you will just refer the pin in this hw
> pin block

I was thinking of adding gpio eventually as a separate attribute with
something like the following. Here cam_d10 pin is used as gpio109:

cam_d10.gpio_109 {
	pinctrl-simple,cells = <0xfa 0x104>;	/* OMAP_PIN_INPUT | OMAP_MUX_MODE4 */
	gpio = <&gpio4 13 0>;			/* gpio109 */
};

The reasoning for this is that as we may not care about the gpio number
for all pins, it should be optional. Would that work for you?

Regards,

Tony
--
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/