Re: [PATCH 02/12] pinctrl: basic Nomadik pinctrl interface
From: Stephen Warren
Date: Wed May 09 2012 - 16:34:51 EST
On 05/08/2012 03:44 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx>
> This adds a scratch pin control interface to the Nomadik pinctrl
> driver, and defines the pins and groups in the DB8500 ASIC. We
> define GPIO ranges to cover the pins exposed. The DB8500 has
> more pins than this but we restrict the driver to the pins that
> can be controlled from the combined GPIO and pin control hardware
> to begin with.
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-nomadik.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-nomadik.c
> +static int nmk_list_groups(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev, unsigned selector)
> + struct nmk_pinctrl *npct = pinctrl_dev_get_drvdata(pctldev);
> + if (selector >= npct->soc->ngroups)
> + return -EINVAL;
I think all the other drivers removed this error-checking from functions
called by the pinctrl core, assuming that the core would error-check any
user-supplied data and respect limits in the pinctrl device descriptor.
> +static int __devinit nmk_pinctrl_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> + /* Poke in other ASIC variants here */
> + if (platid->driver_data == PINCTRL_NMK_DB8500)
> + nmk_pinctrl_db8500_init(&npct->soc);
Other platforms have a unique top-level driver for each variant, with
the probe() function for each variant calling into a utility function.
That way, the common/utility code doesn't need to contain a
table/list/... of all the variants. Can the same approach be used here?
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/