linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] pinctrl: zynqmp: Support muxing individual 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: <d64eb924-0f12-44c2-98e2-5e682292645d@amd.com>
Date: Wed, 8 May 2024 13:54:58 +0200
From: Michal Simek <michal.simek@....com>
To: Sean Anderson <sean.anderson@...ux.dev>,
 Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc: linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
 Krishna Potthuri <sai.krishna.potthuri@....com>,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski
 <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] pinctrl: zynqmp: Support muxing individual pins



On 5/6/24 16:45, Sean Anderson wrote:
> On 5/6/24 02:43, Linus Walleij wrote:
>> On Fri, May 3, 2024 at 6:22 PM Sean Anderson <sean.anderson@...ux.dev> wrote:
>>
>>> This series adds support for muxing individual pins, instead of
>>> requiring groups to be muxed together. See [1] for additional
>>> discussion.
>>>
>>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/5bb0dc7e-4c89-4f3d-abc6-41ae9ded5ae9@linux.dev/
>>
>> The way I usually would recommend to solve this would be to
>> define new subgroups, so e.g. for a UARTS:
>>
>> uart0_grp = pin_rx, pin_tx, pin_cts, pin_dts, pin_dcd;
>>
>> And today this would be used like that:
>>
>> mux0:
>>      function = "uart0";
>>      groups = "uart0_grp";
>>
>> Then we realize that not everyone need all the modem
>> control signals provided. What to do. Well this:
>>
>> uart0_rxtx_grp = pin_rx, pin_tx:
>> uart0_modem_grp = pin_cts, pin_dts, pin_dcd;
>>
>> mux0:
>>      function = "uart0";
>>      groups = "uart0_rxtx_grp";
>>
>> Now the CTS, DTS, DCD pins can be reused for something
>> else such as GPIO.
>>
>> I *know* that this breaks ABI: the driver group definitions change
>> and the device tree needs to be changed too.
>>
>> This only matters if the users have a habit of distributing the
>> kernel and DTB separately so a new kernel needs to support
>> and old DTB. This varies in how much control we have but I
>> think for Xilinx systems the kernel and DTB are always updated
>> in lockstep, so it really does not matter?
> 
> Well, the pin groups are actually defined in the PMU firmware. And
> frankly, I don't see the point of pin "groups" when there are not actual
> pin groups at the hardware level. The pins can all be muxed
> individually, so there's no point in adding artificial groups on top.
> Just mux the pins like the hardware allows and everything is easy. Cuts
> down on the absurd number of strings too.

That Linus example is split which would make sense but as Sean said HW is not 
really working like this. Because you can actually take tx from group0 and rx 
from group5. You can't configure it in design tools but you can configure via 
registers and it will just work fine.

Thanks,
Michal