[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <557EF6D9.6050503@wwwdotorg.org>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2015 10:01:29 -0600
From: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
To: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@...el.com>
CC: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linus.walleij@...aro.org, nicolas.ferre@...el.com
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: introduce complex pin description
On 06/10/2015 09:04 AM, Ludovic Desroches wrote:
> Using a string to describe a pin in the device tree can be not enough.
> Some controllers may need extra information to fully describe a pin. It
> concerns mainly controllers which have a per pin muxing approach which
> don't fit well the notions of groups and functions.
> Instead of using a pin name, a 32 bit value is used. The 16 least
> significant bits are used for the pin number. Other 16 bits can be used to
> store extra parameters.
The driver for the pin controller is supposed to provide this
information in a table. The whole point of having a driver, rather than
a table/list of raw register values in the DT, is so the driver can
provide this information at a semantic level. This information is fixed
per SoC and so make sense to put into a driver, while the board-specific
configuration varies wildly, and hence makes sense to put into DT.
--
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