[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACRpkdaYgpY=Anem00tPS=HPCD5XUrfWmWjvPkszggnHCpgK2Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2019 13:16:20 +0100
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>,
Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>,
Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@...ux.intel.com>,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
intel-gfx <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
"open list:DRM PANEL DRIVERS" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] drm/i915/dsi: Control panel and backlight enable
GPIOs from VBT
On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 12:11 PM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com> wrote:
> Ugh, taking one last look at the "pinctrl: Export pinctrl_unregister_mappings"
> patch it is no good, sorry.
Ooops!
> Linus, can you please drop this from your -next ?
Sure, done.
> So I see 2 options:
> 1) Add an orig_map member to maps_node and use that in the comparison,
> this is IMHO somewhat ugly
>
> 2) Add a new pinctrl_register_mappings_no_dup helper and document in
> pinctrl_unregister_mappings kdoc that it can only be used together
> with the no_dup variant.
>
> I believe that 2 is by far the best option. Linus do you agree or
> do you have any other suggestions?
What about (3) look for all calls to pinctrl_register_mappings()
in the kernel.
Hey it is 2 places in total:
arch/arm/mach-u300/core.c: pinctrl_register_mappings(u300_pinmux_map,
drivers/pinctrl/cirrus/pinctrl-madera-core.c: ret =
pinctrl_register_mappings(pdata->gpio_configs,
Delete __initdata from the u300 table, the other one seems
safe. Fold this into your patch.
Go with the original idea.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
Powered by blists - more mailing lists