[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACRpkdYbOTXmap-vJy4JNZSaZnE=yzC35EPD2F=bD8gWdD8-GQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 27 May 2024 13:05:45 +0200
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To: Esben Haabendal <esben@...nix.com>
Cc: Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>, Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>, Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>, Dong Aisheng <aisheng.dong@....com>, Jacky Bai <ping.bai@....com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Rasmus Villemoes <rasmus.villemoes@...vas.dk>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, imx@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] ARM: imx: only enable pinctrl as needed
On Mon, May 6, 2024 at 12:24 PM Esben Haabendal <esben@...nix.com> wrote:
> As not all mach-imx platforms has support for run-time changes of pin
> configurations (such as LS1021A), a more selective approach to enabling
> pinctrl infrastructure makes sense, so that an e.g. an LS1021A only kernel
> could be built without pinctrl support.
>
> This is a very late follow up v1 3 years ago [1]. The situation seems to be
> unchanged since then, and I have tried to incorporate the requested
> changes.
What is the verdict from the i.MX pin control maintainers on this?
I can merge this into the pin control tree for v6.11 but it'd be nice
to get an ACK from the maintainers first.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
Powered by blists - more mailing lists