[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51F82F58.8090705@wwwdotorg.org>
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 15:25:44 -0600
From: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
To: Andrew Chew <AChew@...dia.com>
CC: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>,
"rob.herring@...xeda.com" <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
"pawel.moll@....com" <pawel.moll@....com>,
"mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
"ian.campbell@...rix.com" <ian.campbell@...rix.com>,
"rob@...dley.net" <rob@...dley.net>,
"sameo@...ux.intel.com" <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
"lee.jones@...aro.org" <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
"grant.likely@...aro.org" <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
"ian@...mlogic.co.uk" <ian@...mlogic.co.uk>,
"j-keerthy@...com" <j-keerthy@...com>,
"gg@...mlogic.co.uk" <gg@...mlogic.co.uk>,
Rhyland Klein <rklein@...dia.com>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mfd: palmas: Add DVFS mux setting
On 07/30/2013 02:53 PM, Andrew Chew wrote:
>> On 07/27/2013 03:55 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
>>> On Saturday 27 July 2013 03:42 AM, Andrew Chew wrote:
>>>> I wrote:
>>>>> Andrew wrote:
>>>>>> [adding a third pinmux configuration property to Palmas's DT]
>>>>>
>>>>> How does this interact with the pinctrl driver that Laxman just sent
>>>>> for Palmas?
>>>>>
>>>>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/26/141
>>>>> [PATCH 0/2] pinctrl: palmas: add pincontrol driver
>> ..
>>>> Abandoning this patch.
>> ...
>>> once we will have the pincontrol driver then mux pads are become
>> redundant.
>>
>> OK. The driver should probably operate like this then:
>>
>> * During probe(), parse the ti,mux-pad* parameters, if present, and apply
>> them. This is needed to maintain compatibility with old DTs that may contain
>> these properties.
>>
>> * At the end of probe(), register the pinctrl driver. If standard pinctrl
>> properties are present in DT, these will then be applied. These may override
>> the values set by any ti,mux-pad* properties if they were present.
>>
>> Also, we should remove, or mark deprecated, the ti,mux-pad* properties in
>> the binding document when adding pinctrl support.
>
> Sounds reasonable to me. The fate of my patch hasn't really been discussed, though.
> Can we apply it, to make the ti,mux-pad* stuff complete?
Oh, I thought you said you were dropping it. I don't see a need to apply
it if the correct approach is Laxman's pinctrl driver.
--
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