[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANqRtoRn--Ze3ayoag71iYTKXEG1eNa8qyXEAJ7vCZhRo5yHPw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 07:29:48 +0900
From: Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>
To: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
SH-Linux <linux-sh@...r.kernel.org>,
"Simon Horman [Horms]" <horms@...ge.net.au>,
Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/05 v2] pinctrl: sh-pfc: r7s72100 base support
Hi Wolfram,
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 6:04 AM, Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> +#define _P_DATA(bank, pin, name, sfx) \
>> + PINMUX_DATA(name##_DATA, name##_PMC_0, name##_PIPC_0, \
>> + name##_PIBC_1, name##_PBDC_1)
>> +
>> +#define _P_FN(n, fn, pfcae, pfce, pfc) \
>> + PINMUX_DATA(n##_MARK_FN##fn, n##_PMC_1, n##_PIPC_1, \
>> + n##_PFCAE_##pfcae, n##_PFCE_##pfce, n##_PFC_##pfc)
>
> I need to apply this patch, otherwise my i2c pinmuxing fails?
Thanks. It looks to me like the _P_FN() bits would be mainly needed.
Can you try to omit the _P_DATA() portion and check if it is still
behaving as expected?
Cheers,
/ magnus
--
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