linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] pinctrl: single: bit-per-mux DT flexibility, probe robustness, and consistent pinconf offsets

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: <20260206042215.GA5376@atomide.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2026 06:22:15 +0200
From: Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
To: Billy Tsai <billy_tsai@...eedtech.com>
Cc: Haojian Zhuang <haojian.zhuang@...aro.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-omap@...r.kernel.org" <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linus Walleij <linusw@...nel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"andrew@...econstruct.com.au" <andrew@...econstruct.com.au>,
	BMC-SW <BMC-SW@...eedtech.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] pinctrl: single: bit-per-mux DT flexibility,
 probe robustness, and consistent pinconf offsets

Hi,

* Billy Tsai <billy_tsai@...eedtech.com> [260204 06:54]:
> Hi Tony,
> 
> This series proposes a set of changes to pinctrl-single motivated by
> bit-per-mux SoC designs such as ASPEED AST2700 (per-pin DT encoding,
> aligned pinconf offsets, and allowing probe to continue when the MMIO
> region is already reserved).
> 
> Linus reviewed the series and noted that he would prefer a custom
> pinctrl driver using existing helpers and the pinmux = <...> DT
> property, rather than extending pinctrl-single, and suggested that the
> pinctrl-single maintainers review the approach before any merge
> decision.
> 
> I would appreciate your guidance on whether extending
> pinctrl-single in this direction is acceptable, or if the preference is
> to pursue a dedicated driver instead.

I agree with what Linus that separate more targeted drivers are better
to avoid the drivers getting complex. With the GENERIC_PIN* helpers doing
targeted drivers should be trivial.

My preference would be to move the bit-per-mux handling out of the
pinctrl-single driver into a separate pinctrl-single-bit type driver.
Seems that can still handle the cases where no hardware specific driver
is needed.

This would simplify pinctrl-single driver quite a bit, and would make
the new driver quite simple too AFAIK.

Regards,

Tony