linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 3/4] arm64: dts: ti: Add pinctrl entries for AM62D2 family of SoCs

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: <20250708202259.GA904737-robh@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2025 15:22:59 -0500
From: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To: Paresh Bhagat <p-bhagat@...com>
Cc: nm@...com, vigneshr@...com, praneeth@...com, kristo@...nel.org,
	krzk+dt@...nel.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, khasim@...com, v-singh1@...com,
	afd@...com, bb@...com, devarsht@...com, s-vadapalli@...com,
	andrew@...n.ch
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 3/4] arm64: dts: ti: Add pinctrl entries for AM62D2
 family of SoCs

On Tue, Jul 08, 2025 at 02:28:38PM +0530, Paresh Bhagat wrote:
> Update k3-pinctrl file to include pin definitions for AM62D2 family of
> SoCs.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Paresh Bhagat <p-bhagat@...com>
> Reviewed-by: Devarsh Thakkar <devarsht@...com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-pinctrl.h | 3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-pinctrl.h b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-pinctrl.h
> index cac7cccc1112..0cf57179c974 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-pinctrl.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-pinctrl.h
> @@ -63,6 +63,9 @@
>  #define AM62AX_IOPAD(pa, val, muxmode)		(((pa) & 0x1fff)) ((val) | (muxmode))
>  #define AM62AX_MCU_IOPAD(pa, val, muxmode)	(((pa) & 0x1fff)) ((val) | (muxmode))
>  
> +#define AM62DX_IOPAD(pa, val, muxmode)		(((pa) & 0x1fff)) ((val) | (muxmode))
> +#define AM62DX_MCU_IOPAD(pa, val, muxmode)	(((pa) & 0x1fff)) ((val) | (muxmode))
> +
>  #define AM62PX_IOPAD(pa, val, muxmode)		(((pa) & 0x1fff)) ((val) | (muxmode))
>  #define AM62PX_MCU_IOPAD(pa, val, muxmode)	(((pa) & 0x1fff)) ((val) | (muxmode))

Why is the same expression just repeated over and over? Looks like this 
needs some refactoring.