[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <91bcc765-2e56-433d-a629-c5255fc8d256@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2024 17:27:00 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: neil.armstrong@...aro.org, Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@...libre.com>,
Xianwei Zhao <xianwei.zhao@...ogic.com>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
<conor+dt@...nel.org>, Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>,
Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-amlogic@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] dt-bindings: pinctrl: Add support for Amlogic A4
SoCs
On 21/10/2024 12:38, neil.armstrong@...aro.org wrote:
>>> ====><=================
>>> +/* Standard port */
>>> +#define GPIOB_START 0
>>> +#define GPIOB_NUM 14
>>> +
>>> +#define GPIOD_START (GPIOB_START + GPIOB_NUM)
>>> +#define GPIOD_NUM 16
>>> +
>>> +#define GPIOE_START (GPIOD_START + GPIOD_NUM)
>>> +#define GPIOE_NUM 2
>>> +
>>> +#define GPIOT_START (GPIOE_START + GPIOE_NUM)
>>> +#define GPIOT_NUM 23
>>> +
>>> +#define GPIOX_START (GPIOT_START + GPIOT_NUM)
>>> +#define GPIOX_NUM 18
>>> +
>>> +#define PERIPHS_PIN_NUM (GPIOX_START + GPIOX_NUM)
>>> +
>>> +/* Aobus port */
>>> +#define GPIOAO_START 0
>>> +#define GPIOAO_NUM 7
>>> +
>>> +/* It's a special definition, put at the end, just 1 num */
>>> +#define GPIO_TEST_N (GPIOAO_START + GPIOAO_NUM)
>>> +#define AOBUS_PIN_NUM (GPIO_TEST_N + 1)
>>> +
>>> +#define AMLOGIC_GPIO(port, offset) (port##_START + (offset))
>>> ====><=================
>>>
>>> is exactly what rob asked for, and you nacked it.
>>
>> No, this is not what was asked, at least according to my understanding.
>> Number of GPIOs is not an ABI. Neither is their relationship, where one
>> starts and other ends.
>
> I confirm this need some work, but it moved the per-pin define to start
> and ranges, so what did rob expect ?
>
>>
>> Maybe I missed something, but I could not find any users of these in the
>> DTS. Look:
>>
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241014-a4_pinctrl-v2-3-3e74a65c285e@amlogic.com/
>
> So you want consumers before the bindings ? strange argument
>
>>
>> Where is any of above defines?
>>
>> Maybe they will be visible in the consumer code, but I did not imagine
>> such use. You expect:
>> reset-gpios = <&ctrl GPIOAO_START 1>???
>
> No I expect:
> reset-gpios = <&ctrl AMLOGIC_GPIO(B, 0) 1>;
>
> but the macro should go along the dts like we did for the reset defines,
> so perhaps this is the solution ?
OK, so I said it was not a binding:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/u4afxqc3ludsic4n3hs3r3drg3ftmsbcwfjltic2mb66foo47x@xe57gltl77hq/
and you here confirm, if I understood you correctly, that it goes with
the DTS like reset defines (I assume non-ID like defines?), so also not
a binding?
What are we disagreeing with?
Just to recall, Jerome asked whether you have to now use arbitrary
numbers in DTS and my answer was: not. It's still the same answer.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists