RE: [PATCH v2 0/3] Renesas R9A06G032 PINCTRL Driver

[Phil Edworthy]

Hi Jacopo,

On 03 September 2018 11:34, jacopo mondi wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 02:12:52PM +0100, Phil Edworthy wrote:
> > This implements the pinctrl driver for the RZ/N1 family of devices, including
> > the R9A06G032 (RZ/N1D) device.
> >
> > One area that is likely to be contentious is the use of 'virtual pins' for the
> > MDIO pinmuxing. The driver uses two pins (170 and 171) that don't exist on
> the
> > device to configure the MDIO source within the RZ/N1 devices. On these
> devices,
> > there are two Ethernet MACs, a 5-Port Switch, numerous industrial
> Ethernet
> > peripherals, any of which can be the MDIO source. Configuring the MDIO
> source
> > could be done without the virtual pins, e.g. by extending the functions to
> > cover all MDIO variants (a total of 32 additional functions), but this would
> > allow users to misconfigure individual MDIO pins, rather than assign all
> MDIO
> > pins to a MDIO source. The choice of how to implement this will affect the
> > DT bindings.
> >
> > This series was originally written by Michel Pollet whilst at Renesas, and I
> > have taken over this work.
> >
> > One point from Michel's v1 series:
> > "Note, I used renesas,rzn1-pinmux node to specify the pinmux constants,
> > and I also don't use some of the properties documented in
> > pinctrl-bindings.txt on purpose, as they are too limited for my use
> > (I need to be able to set, clear, ignore or reset level, pull up/down
> > and function as the pinmux might be set by another OS/core running
> > concurently)."
> >
> 
> I start by saying that I don't know this HW pin controller well, so
> I might be missing something, but as commented on the original series from
> Micheal, I still don't see why you need a custom property here...
> 
> My understanding, looking at this comment and the header provided by
> patch [1/3] (include/dt-bindings/pinctrl/rzn1-pinctrl.h) is that
> basically need to control pull-up/down and the output driver strength.
> 
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/pinctrl-bindings.txt reports
> a set of generic pin configuration properties to be applied to a pin
> configuration (and multiplexing) pin controller child node that fully
> express all (most?) of your needs.
> 
> Eg. a pin configuration with pull up applied, using examples from your
> cover letter should be expressed as
> 
> Your example:
>          &pinctrl {
>                  pinsuart0: pinsuart0 {
>                          renesas,rzn1-pinmux-ids = <
>                                  RZN1_MUX(103, UART0_I)  /* UART0_TXD */
>                                  RZN1_MUX_PUP(104, UART0_I)      /* UART0_RXD */
>                          >;
>                  };
>          };
> 
> Using standard pinctroller bindings pin configuration properties:
> 
>          &pinctrl {
>                  pinsuart0: uart0  {
>                         pinsuart_tx0 {
>                                 pinmux = <103, UART0_I>;  /* UART0_TXD */
>                         };
> 
>                         pinsuart_rx0 {
>                                  pinmux = <104, UART0_I>; /* UART0_RXD */
>                                  bias-pull-up;
>                         };
>                  };
>          };
> 
> Is there anything I am missing? Maybe from the interaction with
> "another OS/core running concurrently" you mentioned? In this case if
> you only have to perform pin configuration (because muxing is handled
> already) things are even simpler, just use the pin configuration
> bindings, without involving muxing at all:
> 
>         &pinctrl {
>                 pinsuart_conf: uart0 {
>                         pins = <103, 104>;
>                         bias-pull-up;
>                  };
>          };

Sorry I didnât address your point.
The only reason we want to use new properties is so the driver can process
dts files that have been generated from an existing PinMux App. That output
is used by VxWorks as well as our out-of-tree Linux port. If that is not a
good enough reason to add new properties, then I can't see any technical
reason not to use the existing bindings.
The use with another OS running on a different core should not be a barrier
as it must not use the same pins as Linux.

Thanks
Phil

> Thanks
>   j
> 
> > Patch 0003 should really be applied after patch:
> >  "ARM: dts: r9a06g032: Correct UART and add all other UARTs", see
> >  https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg673525.html
> >
> > Main changes:
> > v2:
> >  - Change to generic rzn1 family driver, instead of device specific.
> >  - Review comments fixed.
> >  - Fix error handling during probe
> >
> > Phil Edworthy (3):
> >   dt-bindings: pinctrl: renesas,rzn1-pinctrl: documentation
> >   pinctrl: renesas: Renesas RZ/N1 pinctrl driver
> >   ARM: dts: r9a06g032: Add pinctrl node
> >
> >  .../bindings/pinctrl/renesas,rzn1-pinctrl.txt      |  97 +++
> >  arch/arm/boot/dts/r9a06g032.dtsi                   |   8 +
> >  drivers/pinctrl/Kconfig                            |  10 +
> >  drivers/pinctrl/Makefile                           |   1 +
> >  drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-rzn1.c                     | 844 +++++++++++++++++++++
> >  include/dt-bindings/pinctrl/rzn1-pinctrl.h         | 191 +++++
> >  6 files changed, 1151 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/renesas,rzn1-pinctrl.txt
> >  create mode 100644 drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-rzn1.c
> >  create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/pinctrl/rzn1-pinctrl.h
> >
> > --
> > 2.7.4
> >