linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] ARM: OMAP2+: omap_device: add dynamic pinctrl handling

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: <51E78ED4.2020107@ti.com>
Date:	Thu, 18 Jul 2013 09:44:36 +0300
From:	Roger Quadros <rogerq@...com>
To:	Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>
CC:	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
	Kevin Hilman <khilman@...aro.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	<linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] ARM: OMAP2+: omap_device: add dynamic pinctrl handling

On 07/17/2013 03:30 PM, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
> On 07/17/2013 02:57 PM, Roger Quadros wrote:
>> Hi Grygorii,
>>
>> On 07/17/2013 02:41 PM, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
>>> Hi Tony, Kevin
>>>
>>> This patch series introduces dynamic pinctrl handling in OMAP device framework
>>> in the same way as it was before switching to DT.
>>> This allow OMAP devices driver's developers to simply add dynamic pinctrl
>>> handling for "default", "active", "idle", "sleep" PIN states in their drivers
>>> by modifying DT definitions only - no modifications in drivers code are not needed.
>>>
>>
>> Overall I like the idea but can we make a provision for device drivers to override
>> this default pin state handling?
>>
>> The OMAP EHCI driver is one such special case where the wakeup mechanism is tied to pinctrl states
>> as it uses IO daisy chaining to implement wakeup.
>> So depending on whether wakeup needs to be enabled or not I must be able to chose whether
>> I put the pin in just "sleep" state or "sleep with wakeup" state.
> 
> I think, in this case you can't use default behavior and need to define
> custom pins states like "sleep_wakeup"/"sleep_no_wakeup" and do not
> define pins state with name "sleep', so Device core and OMAP device
> framework will not touch your pins.

Yes, I think this should be fine. Thanks.

cheers,
-roger
--
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/