Re: [PATCH 01/03] Make non-linear GPIO ranges accesible from gpiolib

[Christian Ruppert <christian.ruppert@abilis.com>]

On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 04:01:05PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 3:28 PM, Christian Ruppert
> <christian.ruppert@abilis.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 01:58:35PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> >> On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Christian Ruppert
> >> <christian.ruppert@abilis.com> wrote:
> >> > +In addition, named groups of pins can be mapped to pin groups of a given
> >> > +pin controller using the gpio-ranges property as described below:
> >> > +
> >> > +       gpio-range-list ::= <single-gpio-range> [gpio-range-list]
> >> > +       single-gpio-range ::= <numeric-gpio-range> | <named-gpio-range>
> >> > +       numeric-gpio-range ::=
> >> > +                       <pinctrl-phandle> <gpio-base> <pinctrl-base> <count>
> >> > +       named-gpio-range ::= <pinctrl-phandle> <gpio-base> '<0 0>'
> >> > +       pinctrl-phanle : phandle to pin controller node.
> >>
> >> phanle really?
> >
> > Yes, this is actually identical to the numeric ranges. It specifies the
> > pin controller which is "responsible" for the pins/pin group in
> > question.
> 
> I was more thinking about the speling, should it not be "phandle"?
> 
> > The named pin groups actually are a physical property of the pin
> > controller hardware (well, at least the pin groups are, the names are
> > not ;).
> 
> OK.
> 
> It would be good if the names of the group could match, as close
> as possible, the names given to the same identity in the data
> sheet or similar documentation.

This is the idea. In many cases, the names are more coherent over
several product/package variants than the numbers and it is much easier
to make names coherent with (at least our) hardware documentation than
numbers.

[An updated patch with all the other comments integrated will follow]