[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAOZdJXU2hN+9TE=XN55TZF_W-0hxHZmK5330i6hwrhOERKFetw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 17:54:56 -0500
From: Timur Tabi <timur@...eaurora.org>
To: Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Linus <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] pinctrl: add Intel BayTrail GPIO/pinctrl support
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 6:33 AM, Mathias Nyman
<mathias.nyman@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> Pins may be muxed to alternate function instead of gpio by firmware.
> This driver does not touch the pin muxing and expect firmare
> to set pin muxing and pullup/down properties properly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@...ux.intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/pinctrl/Kconfig | 12 +
> drivers/pinctrl/Makefile | 1 +
> drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-baytrail.c | 543 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I know it's been ten months since you posted this driver, but I have a
question. If this driver does not touch the pin muxing, and it
doesn't even call pinctrl_register(), then why is it in
drivers/pinctrl? It's not a pinctrl driver. Why isn't this a regular
GPIO drivers in drivers/gpio?
--
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the
Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation.
--
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