[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20260209144250.GC5376@atomide.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2026 16:42:50 +0200
From: Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
To: Linus Walleij <linusw@...nel.org>
Cc: Billy Tsai <billy_tsai@...eedtech.com>,
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>,
"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
* Linus Walleij <linusw@...nel.org> [260209 09:51]:
> On Mon, Feb 9, 2026 at 3:25 AM Billy Tsai <billy_tsai@...eedtech.com> wrote:
>
> > To make sure I align with your expectations:
> > 1) Would you prefer the new driver to be fully standalone (using the
> > GENERIC_PIN* helpers + syscon/regmap-mmio), rather than trying to
> > refactor/export helpers from pinctrl-single?
>
> Yes. Conor improved these helpers so now it should be possible
> to use these to do a very simple and slim driver for what you
> want to do.
>
> > Action item: Introduce a new pinctrl-single-bit.c driver and DT
> > binding, which can also cover the existing bit-per-mux logic currently
> > in pinctrl-single.c.
>
> Sounds about right.
>
> > 2) For the syscon/regmap hookup, is it acceptable to add a syscon phandle
> > property in DT (e.g. "syscon = <&scu>;") for the new driver to obtain
> > the regmap, or do you prefer a different binding/property name?
>
> This works for me.
Great, sounds good to me too!
Thanks,
Tony
Powered by blists - more mailing lists