From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 11:08:40 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] pinctrl: phandle entries will be applied sequentially In-Reply-To: <20131010072624.GA29191@S2101-09.ap.freescale.net> References: <1381297324-19006-1-git-send-email-shawn.guo@linaro.org> <20131010072624.GA29191@S2101-09.ap.freescale.net> Message-ID: <20131010100840.GP25034@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 03:26:26PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote: > However, my patch is talking about a different thing. For example, we > have a device whose pinctrl-0 consists of two phandle entries that point > to pin configuration nodes foo and bar. > > pinctrl-0 = <&foo &bar>; > > foo { > ... > }; > > bar { > ... > }; > > My patch only wants to make it clear that the configuration specified by > node foo will be applied to pin controller first, and the configuration > defined in node bar will be applied after that. When both nodes have > configuration for a pin, these two configs for the same pin go to two > different pinctrl_setting structures. And these two pinctrl_settings > can not be applied accumulatedly but only sequentially. That's what my > patch talks about. I still say this is a potentially dangerous thing, and in my case of overriding the DAT3 pull-sense, it will cause the pin to glitch if nothing is connected to it. So even if you do get this clarified, I am *not* happy to change my patch.