[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <74FFF1F2D1BF3EFF+aUjsbTB607IkAY87@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2025 14:59:57 +0800
From: Troy Mitchell <troy.mitchell@...ux.spacemit.com>
To: Yixun Lan <dlan@...too.org>, Linus Walleij <linusw@...nel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>
Cc: Troy Mitchell <troy.mitchell@...ux.spacemit.com>,
linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, spacemit@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/3] pinctrl: spacemit: k3: add initial pin support
On Sat, Dec 20, 2025 at 06:14:54PM +0800, Yixun Lan wrote:
> For the pinctrl IP of SpacemiT's K3 SoC, it has different register offset
> comparing with previous SoC generation, so introduce a function to do the
> pin to offset mapping. Also add all the pinctrl data.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yixun Lan <dlan@...too.org>
> ---
> drivers/pinctrl/spacemit/Kconfig | 4 +-
> drivers/pinctrl/spacemit/pinctrl-k1.c | 354 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> 2 files changed, 352 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
[...]
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/spacemit/pinctrl-k1.c b/drivers/pinctrl/spacemit/pinctrl-k1.c
[...]
> +static unsigned int spacemit_k3_pin_to_offset(unsigned int pin)
> +{
> + unsigned int offset = pin > 130 ? (pin + 2) : pin;
Is this necessary? I think it's hard to read. Why not:
```
if (pin > 130)
pin += 2;
return pin << 2;
```
This avoids the extra variable and makes the code clearer.
> +
> + return offset << 2;
> +}
> +
>
- Troy
Powered by blists - more mailing lists