| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <b2571e30-d543-9288-68cf-1af86bb5f4bc@amlogic.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2018 14:07:43 +0800
From: Yixun Lan <yixun.lan@...ogic.com>
To: Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com>
CC: <yixun.lan@...ogic.com>, Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>,
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@...libre.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Carlo Caione <carlo@...one.org>,
<linux-amlogic@...ts.infradead.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@...libre.com>,
Xingyun Chen <xingyu.chen@...ogic.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] ARM64: dts: meson-axg: uart: Add the pinctrl info
description
Hi Martin
On 01/08/18 04:19, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> Hi Yixun,
>
> On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 1:10 AM, Yixun Lan <yixun.lan@...ogic.com> wrote:
>> Describe the pinctrl info for the UART controller which is found
>> in the Meson-AXG SoCs.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yixun Lan <yixun.lan@...ogic.com>
>> ---
>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/meson-axg.dtsi | 97 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 97 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/meson-axg.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/meson-axg.dtsi
>> index 644d0f9eaf8c..1eb45781c850 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/meson-axg.dtsi
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/meson-axg.dtsi
>> @@ -448,6 +448,70 @@
>> function = "spi1";
>> };
>> };
>> +
>> + uart_a_pins: uart_a {
>> + mux {
>> + groups = "uart_tx_a",
>> + "uart_rx_a";
>> + function = "uart_a";
>> + };
>> + };
>> +
>> + uart_a_cts_rts_pins: uart_a_cts_rts {
>> + mux {
>> + groups = "uart_cts_a",
>> + "uart_rts_a";
>> + function = "uart_a";
>> + };
>> + };
>> +
>> + uart_b_x_pins: uart_b_x {
>> + mux {
>> + groups = "uart_tx_b_x",
>> + "uart_rx_b_x";
>> + function = "uart_b";
>> + };
>> + };
>> +
>> + uart_b_x_cts_rts_pins: uart_b_x_cts_rts {
>> + mux {
>> + groups = "uart_cts_b_x",
>> + "uart_rts_b_x";
>> + function = "uart_b";
>> + };
>> + };
>> +
>> + uart_b_z_pins: uart_b_z {
>> + mux {
>> + groups = "uart_tx_b_z",
>> + "uart_rx_b_z";
>> + function = "uart_b";
>> + };
>> + };
>> +
>> + uart_b_z_cts_rts_pins: uart_b_z_cts_rts {
>> + mux {
>> + groups = "uart_cts_b_z",
>> + "uart_rts_b_z";
>> + function = "uart_b";
>> + };
>> + };
>> +
>> + uart_ao_b_z_pins: uart_ao_b_z {
>> + mux {
>> + groups = "uart_ao_tx_b_z",
>> + "uart_ao_rx_b_z";
>> + function = "uart_ao_b_gpioz";
> (the following question just came up while I was looking at this
> patch, but I guess it's more a question towards the pinctrl driver)
> the name of the function looks a bit "weird" since below you are also
> using "uart_ao_b"
you right here, it's a question related to pinctrl subsystem.
from my point of view, it's even weird from the hardware perspective:
that, the UART function of AO domain route the pin of EE domain..
> did you choose "uart_ao_b_gpioz" here because we cannot have the same
> function name for the periphs and AO pinctrl or is there some other
> reason?
>
Current there is a conflict in the code level which both two pinctrl
tree (EE, AO) are using the same macro[1] to expand the definitions, so
there would be conflict symbol if we name both as 'uart_ao_b'
I think your idea of having an uniform function 'uart_ao_b' for both
pinctrl subsystem is actually possible/positive..
I will think about your suggestion and come up with a patch later,
thanks a lot!
[1] drivers/pinctrl/meson/pinctrl-meson.h
#define FUNCTION(fn) \
{ \
.name = #fn, \
.groups = fn ## _groups, \
.num_groups = ARRAY_SIZE(fn ## _groups), \
}
> I am asking because I would have expected it to look like this:
> groups = "uart_ao_tx_b_z", "uart_ao_rx_b_z";
> function = "uart_ao_b";
>
> (same for the cts/rts pins below)
>
>> + };
>> + };
>> +
>> + uart_ao_b_z_cts_rts_pins: uart_ao_b_z_cts_rts {
>> + mux {
>> + groups = "uart_ao_cts_b_z",
>> + "uart_ao_rts_b_z";
>> + function = "uart_ao_b_gpioz";
>> + };
>> + };
>> };
>> };
>>
>> @@ -492,12 +556,45 @@
>> gpio-ranges = <&pinctrl_aobus 0 0 15>;
>> };
>>
>> +
> did you add this additional newline on purpose?
>> remote_input_ao_pins: remote_input_ao {
>> mux {
>> groups = "remote_input_ao";
>> function = "remote_input_ao";
>> };
>> };
>> +
>> + uart_ao_a_pins: uart_ao_a {
>> + mux {
>> + groups = "uart_ao_tx_a",
>> + "uart_ao_rx_a";
>> + function = "uart_ao_a";
>> + };
>> + };
>> +
>> + uart_ao_a_cts_rts_pins: uart_ao_a_cts_rts {
>> + mux {
>> + groups = "uart_ao_cts_a",
>> + "uart_ao_rts_a";
>> + function = "uart_ao_a";
>> + };
>> + };
>> +
>> + uart_ao_b_pins: uart_ao_b {
>> + mux {
>> + groups = "uart_ao_tx_b",
>> + "uart_ao_rx_b";
>> + function = "uart_ao_b";
>> + };
>> + };
>> +
>> + uart_ao_b_cts_rts_pins: uart_ao_b_cts_rts {
>> + mux {
>> + groups = "uart_ao_cts_b",
>> + "uart_ao_rts_b";
>> + function = "uart_ao_b";
>> + };
>> + };
>> };
>>
>> pwm_AO_ab: pwm@...0 {
>> --
>> 2.15.1
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> linux-amlogic mailing list
>> linux-amlogic@...ts.infradead.org
>> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-amlogic
>
> Regards
> Martin
>
> .
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists