| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 29 May 2017 21:11:00 +0800
From: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>
To: Icenowy Zheng <icenowy@...c.io>
Cc: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/10] pinctrl: sunxi: add support of R40 to A10
pinctrl driver
On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 06:23:04PM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote:
> R40 is said to be an upgrade of A20, and its pin configuration is also
> similar to A20 (and thus similar to A10).
>
> Add support for R40 to the A10 pinctrl driver.
>
> Signed-off-by: Icenowy Zheng <icenowy@...c.io>
> ---
> drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/Kconfig | 2 +-
> drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-sun4i-a10.c | 272 +++++++++++++++++++++---------
> 2 files changed, 197 insertions(+), 77 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/Kconfig b/drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/Kconfig
> index 624d84e6c936..9d01da3b90bd 100644
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/Kconfig
> @@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ config PINCTRL_SUNXI
> select GPIOLIB
>
> config PINCTRL_SUN4I_A10
> - def_bool MACH_SUN4I || MACH_SUN7I
> + def_bool MACH_SUN4I || MACH_SUN7I || MACH_SUN8I
> select PINCTRL_SUNXI
>
> config PINCTRL_SUN5I
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-sun4i-a10.c b/drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-sun4i-a10.c
> index 159580c04b14..0f6ca8391ea7 100644
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-sun4i-a10.c
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-sun4i-a10.c
[...]
> @@ -162,14 +183,19 @@ static const struct sunxi_desc_pin sun4i_a10_pins[] = {
> SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x3, "can"), /* RX */
> SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x4, "uart1"), /* RING */
> SUNXI_FUNCTION_VARIANT(0x5, "gmac", /* GNULL / ETXERR */
> - PINCTRL_SUN7I_A20),
> + PINCTRL_SUN7I_A20 |
> + PINCTRL_SUN8I_R40),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION_VARIANT(0x6, "i2s1", /* DI */
> - PINCTRL_SUN7I_A20)),
> + PINCTRL_SUN7I_A20 |
> + PINCTRL_SUN8I_R40)),
> /* Hole */
> SUNXI_PIN(SUNXI_PINCTRL_PIN(B, 0),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x0, "gpio_in"),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x1, "gpio_out"),
> - SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x2, "i2c0")), /* SCK */
> + SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x2, "i2c0"), /* SCK */
> + SUNXI_FUNCTION_VARIANT(0x3,
> + "pll-lock-dbg",
Can you stick to underscores to be consistent?
> + PINCTRL_SUN8I_R40)),
> SUNXI_PIN(SUNXI_PINCTRL_PIN(B, 1),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x0, "gpio_in"),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x1, "gpio_out"),
> @@ -177,11 +203,19 @@ static const struct sunxi_desc_pin sun4i_a10_pins[] = {
> SUNXI_PIN(SUNXI_PINCTRL_PIN(B, 2),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x0, "gpio_in"),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x1, "gpio_out"),
> - SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x2, "pwm")), /* PWM0 */
> + SUNXI_FUNCTION_VARIANT(0x2, "pwm", /* PWM0 */
> + PINCTRL_SUN4I_A10 |
> + PINCTRL_SUN7I_A20),
> + SUNXI_FUNCTION_VARIANT(0x3, "pwm", /* PWM0 */
> + PINCTRL_SUN8I_R40)),
> SUNXI_PIN(SUNXI_PINCTRL_PIN(B, 3),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x0, "gpio_in"),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x1, "gpio_out"),
> - SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x2, "ir0"), /* TX */
> + SUNXI_FUNCTION_VARIANT(0x2, "ir0", /* TX */
> + PINCTRL_SUN4I_A10 |
> + PINCTRL_SUN7I_A20),
> + SUNXI_FUNCTION_VARIANT(0x3, "pwm0", /* PWM1 */
The numbering is wrong. Just drop the number altogether, like all the
other instances.
> + PINCTRL_SUN8I_R40),
> /*
> * The SPDIF block is not referenced at all in the A10 user
> * manual. However it is described in the code leaked and the
> @@ -205,7 +239,8 @@ static const struct sunxi_desc_pin sun4i_a10_pins[] = {
> SUNXI_FUNCTION_VARIANT(0x2, "i2s", /* MCLK */
> PINCTRL_SUN4I_A10),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION_VARIANT(0x2, "i2s0", /* MCLK */
> - PINCTRL_SUN7I_A20),
> + PINCTRL_SUN7I_A20 |
> + PINCTRL_SUN8I_R40),
Maybe we could use "i2s" instead, like on the A10. I don't know where
i2s1 is used, but it certainly isn't routed outside the SoC, and i2s2
looks like it's for dw-hdmi's audio path.
> SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x3, "ac97")), /* MCLK */
> SUNXI_PIN(SUNXI_PINCTRL_PIN(B, 6),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x0, "gpio_in"),
[...]
> @@ -237,31 +275,41 @@ static const struct sunxi_desc_pin sun4i_a10_pins[] = {
> SUNXI_FUNCTION_VARIANT(0x2, "i2s", /* DO1 */
> PINCTRL_SUN4I_A10),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION_VARIANT(0x2, "i2s0", /* DO1 */
> - PINCTRL_SUN7I_A20)),
> + PINCTRL_SUN7I_A20 |
> + PINCTRL_SUN8I_R40),
> + SUNXI_FUNCTION_VARIANT(0x4, "pwm", /* PWM6 */
> + PINCTRL_SUN8I_R40)),
> SUNXI_PIN(SUNXI_PINCTRL_PIN(B, 10),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x0, "gpio_in"),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x1, "gpio_out"),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION_VARIANT(0x2, "i2s", /* DO2 */
> PINCTRL_SUN4I_A10),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION_VARIANT(0x2, "i2s0", /* DO2 */
> - PINCTRL_SUN7I_A20)),
> + PINCTRL_SUN7I_A20 |
> + PINCTRL_SUN8I_R40),
> + SUNXI_FUNCTION_VARIANT(0x4, "pwm", /* PWM7 */
> + PINCTRL_SUN8I_R40)),
> SUNXI_PIN(SUNXI_PINCTRL_PIN(B, 11),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x0, "gpio_in"),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x1, "gpio_out"),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION_VARIANT(0x2, "i2s", /* DO3 */
> PINCTRL_SUN4I_A10),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION_VARIANT(0x2, "i2s0", /* DO3 */
> - PINCTRL_SUN7I_A20)),
> + PINCTRL_SUN7I_A20 |
> + PINCTRL_SUN8I_R40)),
> SUNXI_PIN(SUNXI_PINCTRL_PIN(B, 12),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x0, "gpio_in"),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x1, "gpio_out"),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION_VARIANT(0x2, "i2s", /* DI */
> PINCTRL_SUN4I_A10),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION_VARIANT(0x2, "i2s0", /* DI */
> - PINCTRL_SUN7I_A20),
> + PINCTRL_SUN7I_A20 |
> + PINCTRL_SUN8I_R40),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x3, "ac97"), /* DI */
> /* Undocumented mux function on A10 - See SPDIF MCLK above */
> - SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x4, "spdif")), /* SPDIF IN */
> + SUNXI_FUNCTION_VARIANT(0x4, "spdif", /* SPDIF IN */
> + PINCTRL_SUN4I_A10 |
> + PINCTRL_SUN7I_A20)),
> SUNXI_PIN(SUNXI_PINCTRL_PIN(B, 13),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x0, "gpio_in"),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x1, "gpio_out"),
> @@ -308,7 +356,9 @@ static const struct sunxi_desc_pin sun4i_a10_pins[] = {
You missed PWM4 and PWM5 on pins PB20 and PB21.
> SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x0, "gpio_in"),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x1, "gpio_out"),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x2, "uart0"), /* TX */
> - SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x3, "ir1")), /* TX */
> + SUNXI_FUNCTION_VARIANT(0x3, "ir1", /* TX */
> + PINCTRL_SUN4I_A10 |
> + PINCTRL_SUN7I_A20)),
> SUNXI_PIN(SUNXI_PINCTRL_PIN(B, 23),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x0, "gpio_in"),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x1, "gpio_out"),
[...]
> @@ -916,7 +1000,10 @@ static const struct sunxi_desc_pin sun4i_a10_pins[] = {
> SUNXI_FUNCTION_VARIANT(0x3, "pata", /* ATAD12 */
> PINCTRL_SUN4I_A10),
> SUNXI_FUNCTION_VARIANT(0x3, "emac", /* ETXD1 */
> - PINCTRL_SUN7I_A20),
> + PINCTRL_SUN7I_A20 |
> + PINCTRL_SUN8I_R40),
> + SUNXI_FUNCTION_VARIANT(0x5, "sim", /* DET */
> + PINCTRL_SUN8I_R40),
This is available on all 3 variants.
Should we consider sending a fix for this first? The hardware backing
this pin is not supported, but it would be less confusing to fix it
first instead of introducing a function for all variants in a patch
supposedly for just the R40.
> SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x4, "keypad"), /* IN6 */
> SUNXI_FUNCTION_IRQ(0x6, 16), /* EINT16 */
> SUNXI_FUNCTION(0x7, "csi1")), /* D16 */
[...]
Looks good otherwise.
Regards
ChenYu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists