Re: [PATCH 04/05 v2] pinctrl: sh-pfc: r7s72100 SCIF support

[Laurent Pinchart]

Hi Magnus,

On Wednesday 18 December 2013 07:26:15 Magnus Damm wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 1:08 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > On Tuesday 17 December 2013 11:38:23 Magnus Damm wrote:
> >> From: Magnus Damm <damm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> 
> >> Add support for SCIF functions SCK, TXD, RXD, CTS and RTS to the
> >> r7s72100 PINCTRL code. There are two possible pins that can be used
> >> for TXD (Port 3 Pin 0 Function 6 and Port 3 Pin 1 Function 4) and
> >> because of that are pins broken out into separate functions.
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Magnus Damm <damm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> 
> >>  drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r7s72100.c |  158 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>  1 file changed, 158 insertions(+)
> >> 
> >> --- 0006/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r7s72100.c
> >> +++ work/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r7s72100.c        2013-12-17
> > 
> > 01:09:20.000000000
> > 
> >> +0900 @@ -117,12 +117,170 @@ static const unsigned int __RZ_STR(pfx,
> >> 
> >>  #define RZ_GROUPS(pfx, hw, bank, pin, fn) \
> >>       __RZ_GROUPS(pfx##_##hw##_p##bank##_##pin),
> >> 
> >> +#define SCIF0(fn)                    \
> >> +     fn(scif0, clk, 2, 13, 6)        \
> >> +     fn(scif0, txd, 2, 14, 6)        \
> >> +     fn(scif0, rxd, 2, 15, 6)        \
> >> +     fn(scif0, clk, 4, 8, 7)         \
> >> +     fn(scif0, txd, 4, 9, 7)         \
> >> +     fn(scif0, rxd, 4, 10, 7)        \
> >> +     fn(scif0, clk, 6, 8, 5)         \
> >> +     fn(scif0, txd, 6, 9, 5)         \
> >> +     fn(scif0, rxd, 6, 10, 5)
> > 
> > The SCIF0 SCK, TXD and RXD pins are grouped together with three options to
> > choose from. Unlike the PFC devices we support so far, the driver allows
> > picking pins individually. This allows greater flexibility, at the cost of
> > a more verbose PFC DT node.
> 
> You need more detailed PFC data, yes, but I'm not sure if "Unlike the
> PFC devices we support so far" is a correct statement. =)
> 
> > I assume that this is correct, but could you please confirm that the SoC
> > really allows picking pins individually (for instance using P2.14 as SCIF0
> > TXD together with P6.10 as SCIF0 RXD) ?
> 
> Your example would work just fine, yes. I don't have any hardware to
> test that though. I suspect the same would be fine on all of our SoCs
> actually, unless
> 
> > I also wonder whether other currently supported SoCs wouldn't happen to
> > also support picking pins from different groups, even though they name
> > the groups differently.
> 
> It seems to me that in general the hardware has much more flexibility
> than what the PINCTRL groups actually expose today. In the end it
> depends on the actual hardware, so its a case by case thing:
> 
> A) RZ series: Individual per-pin settings always available
> 
> B) R-Mobile series (PORTnCR + MSELnCR): Individual per-pin settings
> usually available
> 
> C) R-Car series (IPSRnn + MOD_SEL): Shared to some degree, but often
> still allows individual control.
> 
> So with the current PINCTRL interface it looks like we have introduced
> some artificial limitation based on software grouping even though the
> actual hardware often can handle per-pin settings.

That's probably true for some devices, yes. We've started by limiting the 
possibilities on R-Car either rightfully (when IPSR would allow individidual 
control but MODSEL would forbid it) or incorrectly, and have probably carried 
that on to new SoCs. We should carefully review the pin groups in the future.

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart

--
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/