netdev - Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] pinctrl: qcom: Add SDX75 pincontrol driver

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: <66158251-6934-a07f-4b82-4deaa76fa482@quicinc.com>
Date:   Wed, 26 Apr 2023 20:48:29 +0530
From:   Rohit Agarwal <quic_rohiagar@...cinc.com>
To:     <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
CC:     <agross@...nel.org>, <andersson@...nel.org>,
        <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>, <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        <robh+dt@...nel.org>, <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        <richardcochran@...il.com>, <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>,
        <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] pinctrl: qcom: Add SDX75 pincontrol driver


On 4/26/2023 8:34 PM, andy.shevchenko@...il.com wrote:
> Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 02:33:50PM +0530, Rohit Agarwal kirjoitti:
>> Add initial Qualcomm SDX75 pinctrl driver to support pin configuration
>> with pinctrl framework for SDX75 SoC.
>> While at it, reordering the SDX65 entry.
> ...
>
>> +#define FUNCTION(fname)							\
>> +	[msm_mux_##fname] = {						\
>> +		.name = #fname,						\
>> +		.groups = fname##_groups,				\
>> +	.ngroups = ARRAY_SIZE(fname##_groups),				\
>> +	}
> PINCTRL_PINFUNCTION() ?
Ok, Will update this. Shall I also update "PINGROUP" to "PINCTRL_PINGROUP"?
>
> ...
>
>> +static const struct of_device_id sdx75_pinctrl_of_match[] = {
>> +	{.compatible = "qcom,sdx75-tlmm", .data = &sdx75_pinctrl}, {},
> One entry per line.
> And drop comma in the terminator one.
>
>> +};
> No MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE()?
Sure Will update both.

Thanks,
Rohit.
>