linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] pinmux: Add TB10x pinmux driver

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5216704F.60007@wwwdotorg.org>
Date:	Thu, 22 Aug 2013 14:10:55 -0600
From:	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
To:	Christian Ruppert <christian.ruppert@...lis.com>
CC:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Patrice CHOTARD <patrice.chotard@...com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>,
	Sascha Leuenberger <sascha.leuenberger@...lis.com>,
	Pierrick Hascoet <pierrick.hascoet@...lis.com>,
	"linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
	Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@...dia.com>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] pinmux: Add TB10x pinmux driver

On 08/21/2013 09:57 AM, Christian Ruppert wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 06:53:56PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Christian Ruppert
>> <christian.ruppert@...lis.com> wrote:
>>> [Me]
>>>> I don't see any of the port concept creeping into the device tree
>>>> in this version and that is how I think it should be kept:
>>>> the "port" particulars is a thing for the driver and not the
>>>> device tree.
...
>>> In the driver under discussion, pin groups are defined for every
>>> "interface" to make sure that interfaces can be requested in an
>>> orthogonal way by different modules and modules don't have to be "aware"
>>> of which interfaces are grouped into which port (and which other modules
>>> request which other interfaces). A request either succeeds or fails.
>>> Resource management (which interfaces can be mapped simultaneously) is
>>> done inside the pinctrl driver.
>>
>> OK
> 
> This actually looks 100% coherent with Documentation/pinctrl.txt. But
> then I don't understand Stephen's request to introduce the concept of
> "ports" in the device tree. IMHO ports are a hardware limitation which
> should be managed inside the pinctrl driver and if possible not leak
> out of it. Also (as stated above), the concept of "ports" does not even
> exist in the pinmux framework so why introduce it for DT?
> 
> I might have thoroughly misunderstood you here, Stephen. Please be
> patient with me and explain once more.

I don't think I asked for ports to be represented in DT. Do you have
more context?
--
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/