From: jbrunet@baylibre.com (Jerome Brunet)
To: linus-amlogic@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 3/5] ARM64: dts: meson-axg: uart: Add the pinctrl info description
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2018 09:42:54 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1515400974.5048.58.camel@baylibre.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b2571e30-d543-9288-68cf-1af86bb5f4bc@amlogic.com>
On Mon, 2018-01-08 at 14:07 +0800, Yixun Lan wrote:
> > (the following question just came up while I was looking at this
> > patch, but I guess it's more a question towards the pinctrl driver)
> > the name of the function looks a bit "weird" since below you are also
> > using "uart_ao_b"
>
> you right here, it's a question related to pinctrl subsystem.
> from my point of view, it's even weird from the hardware perspective:
> that, the UART function of AO domain route the pin of EE domain..
>
> > did you choose "uart_ao_b_gpioz" here because we cannot have the same
> > function name for the periphs and AO pinctrl or is there some other
> > reason?
> >
>
> Current there is a conflict in the code level which both two pinctrl
> tree (EE, AO) are using the same macro[1] to expand the definitions, so
> there would be conflict symbol if we name both as 'uart_ao_b'
>
> I think your idea of having an uniform function 'uart_ao_b' for both
> pinctrl subsystem is actually possible/positive..
>
> I will think about your suggestion and come up with a patch later,
> thanks a lot!
>
>
> [1] drivers/pinctrl/meson/pinctrl-meson.h
>
> #define FUNCTION(fn) \
> { \
> .name = #fn, \
> .groups = fn ## _groups, \
> .num_groups = ARRAY_SIZE(fn ## _groups), \
> }
The name feels weird because it should have been uart_ao_b_z ... We missed it in
the initial review. Except for correcting the function name, I don't think this
justify a change a pinctrl
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: jbrunet@baylibre.com (Jerome Brunet)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 3/5] ARM64: dts: meson-axg: uart: Add the pinctrl info description
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2018 09:42:54 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1515400974.5048.58.camel@baylibre.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b2571e30-d543-9288-68cf-1af86bb5f4bc@amlogic.com>
On Mon, 2018-01-08 at 14:07 +0800, Yixun Lan wrote:
> > (the following question just came up while I was looking at this
> > patch, but I guess it's more a question towards the pinctrl driver)
> > the name of the function looks a bit "weird" since below you are also
> > using "uart_ao_b"
>
> you right here, it's a question related to pinctrl subsystem.
> from my point of view, it's even weird from the hardware perspective:
> that, the UART function of AO domain route the pin of EE domain..
>
> > did you choose "uart_ao_b_gpioz" here because we cannot have the same
> > function name for the periphs and AO pinctrl or is there some other
> > reason?
> >
>
> Current there is a conflict in the code level which both two pinctrl
> tree (EE, AO) are using the same macro[1] to expand the definitions, so
> there would be conflict symbol if we name both as 'uart_ao_b'
>
> I think your idea of having an uniform function 'uart_ao_b' for both
> pinctrl subsystem is actually possible/positive..
>
> I will think about your suggestion and come up with a patch later,
> thanks a lot!
>
>
> [1] drivers/pinctrl/meson/pinctrl-meson.h
>
> #define FUNCTION(fn) \
> { \
> .name = #fn, \
> .groups = fn ## _groups, \
> .num_groups = ARRAY_SIZE(fn ## _groups), \
> }
The name feels weird because it should have been uart_ao_b_z ... We missed it in
the initial review. Except for correcting the function name, I don't think this
justify a change a pinctrl
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jerome Brunet <jbrunet-rdvid1DuHRBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
To: Yixun Lan <yixun.lan-LpR1jeaWuhtBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org>,
Martin Blumenstingl
<martin.blumenstingl-gM/Ye1E23mwN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman-rdvid1DuHRBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>,
devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>,
Neil Armstrong
<narmstrong-rdvid1DuHRBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>,
linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
Rob Herring <robh+dt-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
Carlo Caione <carlo-KA+7E9HrN00dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
linux-amlogic-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org,
linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org,
Xingyun Chen
<xingyu.chen-LpR1jeaWuhtBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] ARM64: dts: meson-axg: uart: Add the pinctrl info description
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2018 09:42:54 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1515400974.5048.58.camel@baylibre.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b2571e30-d543-9288-68cf-1af86bb5f4bc-LpR1jeaWuhtBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org>
On Mon, 2018-01-08 at 14:07 +0800, Yixun Lan wrote:
> > (the following question just came up while I was looking at this
> > patch, but I guess it's more a question towards the pinctrl driver)
> > the name of the function looks a bit "weird" since below you are also
> > using "uart_ao_b"
>
> you right here, it's a question related to pinctrl subsystem.
> from my point of view, it's even weird from the hardware perspective:
> that, the UART function of AO domain route the pin of EE domain..
>
> > did you choose "uart_ao_b_gpioz" here because we cannot have the same
> > function name for the periphs and AO pinctrl or is there some other
> > reason?
> >
>
> Current there is a conflict in the code level which both two pinctrl
> tree (EE, AO) are using the same macro[1] to expand the definitions, so
> there would be conflict symbol if we name both as 'uart_ao_b'
>
> I think your idea of having an uniform function 'uart_ao_b' for both
> pinctrl subsystem is actually possible/positive..
>
> I will think about your suggestion and come up with a patch later,
> thanks a lot!
>
>
> [1] drivers/pinctrl/meson/pinctrl-meson.h
>
> #define FUNCTION(fn) \
> { \
> .name = #fn, \
> .groups = fn ## _groups, \
> .num_groups = ARRAY_SIZE(fn ## _groups), \
> }
The name feels weird because it should have been uart_ao_b_z ... We missed it in
the initial review. Except for correcting the function name, I don't think this
justify a change a pinctrl
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@baylibre.com>
To: Yixun Lan <yixun.lan@amlogic.com>,
Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>
Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com>,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@baylibre.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
Carlo Caione <carlo@caione.org>,
linux-amlogic@lists.infradead.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Xingyun Chen <xingyu.chen@amlogic.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] ARM64: dts: meson-axg: uart: Add the pinctrl info description
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2018 09:42:54 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1515400974.5048.58.camel@baylibre.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b2571e30-d543-9288-68cf-1af86bb5f4bc@amlogic.com>
On Mon, 2018-01-08 at 14:07 +0800, Yixun Lan wrote:
> > (the following question just came up while I was looking at this
> > patch, but I guess it's more a question towards the pinctrl driver)
> > the name of the function looks a bit "weird" since below you are also
> > using "uart_ao_b"
>
> you right here, it's a question related to pinctrl subsystem.
> from my point of view, it's even weird from the hardware perspective:
> that, the UART function of AO domain route the pin of EE domain..
>
> > did you choose "uart_ao_b_gpioz" here because we cannot have the same
> > function name for the periphs and AO pinctrl or is there some other
> > reason?
> >
>
> Current there is a conflict in the code level which both two pinctrl
> tree (EE, AO) are using the same macro[1] to expand the definitions, so
> there would be conflict symbol if we name both as 'uart_ao_b'
>
> I think your idea of having an uniform function 'uart_ao_b' for both
> pinctrl subsystem is actually possible/positive..
>
> I will think about your suggestion and come up with a patch later,
> thanks a lot!
>
>
> [1] drivers/pinctrl/meson/pinctrl-meson.h
>
> #define FUNCTION(fn) \
> { \
> .name = #fn, \
> .groups = fn ## _groups, \
> .num_groups = ARRAY_SIZE(fn ## _groups), \
> }
The name feels weird because it should have been uart_ao_b_z ... We missed it in
the initial review. Except for correcting the function name, I don't think this
justify a change a pinctrl
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-08 8:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-06 0:10 [PATCH v2 0/5] ARM64: dts: meson-axg: UART DT updates Yixun Lan
2018-01-06 0:10 ` Yixun Lan
2018-01-06 0:10 ` Yixun Lan
2018-01-06 0:10 ` Yixun Lan
2018-01-06 0:10 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] ARM64: dts: meson: uart: fix address space range Yixun Lan
2018-01-06 0:10 ` Yixun Lan
2018-01-06 0:10 ` Yixun Lan
2018-01-06 0:10 ` Yixun Lan
2018-01-08 8:54 ` Jerome Brunet
2018-01-08 8:54 ` Jerome Brunet
2018-01-08 8:54 ` Jerome Brunet
[not found] ` <1515401694.5048.69.camel-rdvid1DuHRBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
2018-01-17 0:01 ` Kevin Hilman
2018-01-17 0:01 ` Kevin Hilman
2018-01-06 0:10 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] ARM64: dts: meson-axg: uart: drop legacy compatible name from EE UART Yixun Lan
2018-01-06 0:10 ` Yixun Lan
2018-01-06 0:10 ` Yixun Lan
2018-01-06 0:10 ` Yixun Lan
2018-01-08 8:56 ` Jerome Brunet
2018-01-08 8:56 ` Jerome Brunet
2018-01-08 8:56 ` Jerome Brunet
2018-01-08 8:56 ` Jerome Brunet
2018-01-06 0:10 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] ARM64: dts: meson-axg: uart: Add the pinctrl info description Yixun Lan
2018-01-06 0:10 ` Yixun Lan
2018-01-06 0:10 ` Yixun Lan
2018-01-06 0:10 ` Yixun Lan
2018-01-07 20:19 ` Martin Blumenstingl
2018-01-07 20:19 ` Martin Blumenstingl
2018-01-07 20:19 ` Martin Blumenstingl
2018-01-07 20:19 ` Martin Blumenstingl
2018-01-08 6:07 ` Yixun Lan
2018-01-08 6:07 ` Yixun Lan
2018-01-08 6:07 ` Yixun Lan
2018-01-08 6:07 ` Yixun Lan
2018-01-08 6:44 ` Yixun Lan
2018-01-08 6:44 ` Yixun Lan
2018-01-08 6:44 ` Yixun Lan
2018-01-08 6:44 ` Yixun Lan
2018-01-08 8:42 ` Jerome Brunet [this message]
2018-01-08 8:42 ` Jerome Brunet
2018-01-08 8:42 ` Jerome Brunet
2018-01-08 8:42 ` Jerome Brunet
2018-01-06 0:10 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] ARM64: dts: meson-axg: complete the pinctrl info for UART_AO_A Yixun Lan
2018-01-06 0:10 ` Yixun Lan
2018-01-06 0:10 ` Yixun Lan
2018-01-06 0:10 ` Yixun Lan
2018-01-06 0:10 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] ARM64: dts: meson-axg: enable the UART_A controller Yixun Lan
2018-01-06 0:10 ` Yixun Lan
2018-01-06 0:10 ` Yixun Lan
2018-01-06 0:10 ` Yixun Lan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1515400974.5048.58.camel@baylibre.com \
--to=jbrunet@baylibre.com \
--cc=linus-amlogic@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.