linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/6] arm64: dts: qcom: msm8976: Declare and use SDC1 pins

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]

Message-ID: <20221215210010.on44gmoefbnsokvt@SoMainline.org>
Date:   Thu, 15 Dec 2022 22:00:10 +0100
From:   Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@...ainline.org>
To:     Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
Cc:     phone-devel@...r.kernel.org,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        ~postmarketos/upstreaming@...ts.sr.ht,
        AngeloGioacchino Del Regno 
        <angelogioacchino.delregno@...ainline.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...ainline.org>,
        Martin Botka <martin.botka@...ainline.org>,
        Jami Kettunen <jami.kettunen@...ainline.org>,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        AngeloGioacchino Del Regno 
        <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
        Luca Weiss <luca@...tu.xyz>,
        Adam Skladowski <a39.skl@...il.com>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] arm64: dts: qcom: msm8976: Declare and use SDC1 pins

On 2022-12-15 14:19:41, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> 
> 
> On 15.12.2022 00:20, Marijn Suijten wrote:
> > Add the pinctrl states for SDC1 and use them on sdhc_1.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@...ainline.org>
> > ---
> >  arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8976.dtsi | 55 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 55 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8976.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8976.dtsi
> > index 05dcb30b0779..7d4c7548882c 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8976.dtsi
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8976.dtsi
> > @@ -508,6 +508,56 @@ tlmm: pinctrl@...0000 {
> >  			interrupt-controller;
> >  			#interrupt-cells = <2>;
> >  
> > +			sdc1_off_state: sdc1-off-state {
> > +				clk-pins {
> > +					pins = "sdc1_clk";
> > +					drive-strength = <2>;
> > +					bias-disable;
> > +				};
> > +
> > +				cmd-pins {
> > +					pins = "sdc1_cmd";
> > +					drive-strength = <2>;
> > +					bias-pull-up;
> > +				};
> > +
> > +				data-pins {
> > +					pins = "sdc1_data";
> > +					drive-strength = <2>;
> > +					bias-pull-up;
> > +				};
> > +
> > +				rclk-pins {
> > +					pins = "sdc1_rclk";
> > +					bias-pull-down;
> > +				};
> > +			};
> > +
> > +			sdc1_on_state: sdc1-on-state {
> > +				clk-pins {
> > +					pins = "sdc1_clk";
> > +					drive-strength = <16>;
> > +					bias-disable;
> > +				};
> > +
> > +				cmd-pins {
> > +					pins = "sdc1_cmd";
> > +					drive-strength = <10>;
> > +					bias-pull-up;
> > +				};
> > +
> > +				data-pins {
> > +					pins = "sdc1_data";
> > +					drive-strength = <10>;
> > +					bias-pull-up;
> > +				};
> > +
> > +				rclk-pins {
> > +					pins = "sdc1_rclk";
> > +					bias-pull-down;
> > +				};
> > +			};
> > +
> >  			spi1_default: spi0-default-state {
> >  				spi-pins {
> >  					pins = "gpio0", "gpio1", "gpio3";
> > @@ -680,6 +730,11 @@ sdhc_1: mmc@...4000 {
> >  				 <&gcc GCC_SDCC1_APPS_CLK>,
> >  				 <&rpmcc RPM_SMD_XO_CLK_SRC>;
> >  			clock-names = "iface", "core", "xo";
> > +
> > +			pinctrl-0 = <&sdc1_on_state>;
> > +			pinctrl-1 = <&sdc1_off_state>;
> > +			pinctrl-names = "default", "sleep";
> pinctrl-names usually goes before pinctrl-N

I thought I had seen them _after_ nowadays, same for reg-names,
phy-names, interrupt-names and clock-names.  What is it?

Regardless, I'd rather keep this consistent across this file (sdc2 also
has it after, same for other *-names) and correct it at once in a
separate patch, if someone really cares.

But really, we should have a checker/autoformatter for these "rules",
instead of all this manual back-and-forth (is this order already set in
stone under Documentation/ or something?).

- Marijn