linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/5] pinctrl: uniphier: Add another audio I/O pin-mux settings for LD20

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 29 Jul 2019 22:44:27 +0900
From:   Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
To:     Kunihiko Hayashi <hayashi.kunihiko@...ionext.com>
Cc:     Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu@...aro.org>,
        Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] pinctrl: uniphier: Add another audio I/O pin-mux
 settings for LD20

On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 7:29 PM Kunihiko Hayashi
<hayashi.kunihiko@...ionext.com> wrote:
>
> This adds support for pinmux settings of aout1b groups. This group includes
> aout1 signals derived from xirq pins.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kunihiko Hayashi <hayashi.kunihiko@...ionext.com>
> ---
>  drivers/pinctrl/uniphier/pinctrl-uniphier-ld20.c | 5 +++++
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/uniphier/pinctrl-uniphier-ld20.c b/drivers/pinctrl/uniphier/pinctrl-uniphier-ld20.c
> index 28e54b3..2c66e70 100644
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/uniphier/pinctrl-uniphier-ld20.c
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/uniphier/pinctrl-uniphier-ld20.c
> @@ -544,6 +544,8 @@ static const struct pinctrl_pin_desc uniphier_ld20_pins[] = {
>
>  static const unsigned aout1_pins[] = {137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142};
>  static const int aout1_muxvals[] = {0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0};
> +static const unsigned aout1b_pins[] = {150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156};
> +static const int aout1b_muxvals[] = {1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1};
>  static const unsigned aoutiec1_pins[] = {135, 136};
>  static const int aoutiec1_muxvals[] = {0, 0};
>  static const unsigned int emmc_pins[] = {19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25};
> @@ -664,6 +666,7 @@ static const unsigned int gpio_range2_pins[] = {
>
>  static const struct uniphier_pinctrl_group uniphier_ld20_groups[] = {
>         UNIPHIER_PINCTRL_GROUP(aout1),
> +       UNIPHIER_PINCTRL_GROUP(aout1b),
>         UNIPHIER_PINCTRL_GROUP(aoutiec1),
>         UNIPHIER_PINCTRL_GROUP(emmc),
>         UNIPHIER_PINCTRL_GROUP(emmc_dat8),
> @@ -708,6 +711,7 @@ static const struct uniphier_pinctrl_group uniphier_ld20_groups[] = {
>  };
>
>  static const char * const aout1_groups[] = {"aout1"};
> +static const char * const aout1b_groups[] = {"aout1b"};

If this has the same functionality as "aout1",
shouldn't it be a part of aout1_groups?




-- 
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada