Re: [PATCH 3/4] ARM: pinctrl: Add Broadcom Capri pinctrl driver

[Linus Walleij]

On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 12:48 AM, Sherman Yin <syin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> So I will go ahead and make the change in pinconf-generic.c and pinctrl-bindings.txt
> to include parsing of the "slew-rate" property and submit it as part of my pinctrl
> changes.

OK, good.

> Question regarding pinctrl-generic: in pinctrl-bindings.txt, this is said about the
> "function" property:
>
> 169- function takes a list of function names/IDs as a required argument. The
> 170  specific binding for the hardware defines:
> 171  - Whether the entries are integers or strings, and their meaning.
> 172  - Whether only a single entry is allowed (which is applied to all entries
> 173    in the pins property), or whether there may alternatively be one entry per
> 174    entry in the pins property, in which case the list lengths must match, and
> 175    for each list index i, the function at list index i is applied to the pin
> 176    at list index i.
>
> (Although it looks like pinconf_generic_dt_subnode_to_map() does not support
> the "one entry per pin feature" for the "function" property yet.)
>
> In my driver, I have the "one entry per pin" support for all my properties instead
> of just the function property, like the "drive_str" property below:
>
> +               grp_1 {
> +                       brcm,pins       = "pin1", "pin2", "pin3";
> +                       brcm,function   = "alt1", "alt2", "alt1";
> +                       brcm,drive_str  = <2 4 6>;
> +                       brcm,slew       = <1>;
> +               };

OK.

> I thought that would be convenient and allow users to group pins together based
> on functionality and without the restriction that the pins must have the same
> properties.  Do you think that's a good idea and are there plans to support that in
> the generic pinconfig?  If so, I can look into porting my implementation to
> pinconf-generic.c - but first I have to figure out how some of the properties would
> work if more than one value could be specified (eg. "bias-disable" which takes no
> values)

Hm I don't quite get it I think. It depends on the old bindings still working
and full compatibility with old device trees. It might be a bit confusing.

I need help from Heiko on this I think.

Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
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/