linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: add a pinctrl_mux_group

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:	Tue, 5 Jun 2012 14:40:43 +0200
From:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
Cc:	Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@....de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: add a pinctrl_mux_group_selected() function

On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 5:26 PM, Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org> wrote:
> On 05/23/2012 09:03 AM, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 May 2012, Stephen Warren wrote:
>>
>>> On 05/22/2012 04:23 PM, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
>>>> This patch adds a new function to allow clients to verify, whether a
>>>> certain group is selected in the currently active setting or not.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@....de>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> Maybe there is already a way to do this without adding a new function, I
>>>> haven't found one, hence this patch.
>>>
>>> This function doesn't currently exist because it breaks the pinctrl
>>> conceptual model, which is that devices ask pinctrl for certain settings
>>> whenever they need them, rather than information flowing the other way.
>>
>> Well, yes, we could tra to ask for each thinkable configuration and see
>> which one(s) succeed, but that doesn't seem very optimal either, even if
>> we only have 3 possibilities for now.
>>
>>> What's the use case for this new functionality?
>>
>> It's MMC. MMC interfaces can use 1, 4, or 8 data lines, depending on the
>> board configuration. The board knows, that it has, say, only 4 data lines
>> routed to the interface, so, it specifies the respective pinctrl
>> configuration as default. Now in the driver we have to know how many
>> data-lines are connected.

I discussed the same scenario the other day, and I sort of understand
this dilemma.

It's popping up when using different default modes for the same
device, the only one I've heard of is MMC that wants to be informed
on how many bits of the bus it should use.

[Stephen]
> If using device tree, the bus-width property should be used. If not
> using device tree, presumably you'd add an equivalent field to the
> platform data.
>
> An alternative (only when not using DT, since there's already a property
> for DT) is that the driver doesn't select pinctrl state "default", but
> instead first looks for e.g. "8bit" and if found uses it, then falls
> back to "4bit", then falls back to "1bit". Whichever state name is
> defined indicates which bus width is available.

But the DT approach seems to actually be less flexible than the old
style platform data here, whereas the method mentioned last here
can probe its way downward. DT just hardcodes it. But maybe this
is usually what you want to do anyway.

Yours,
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/