From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bjorn Andersson Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] pinctrl: Add msm8x74 configuration Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 00:27:01 -0800 Message-ID: <20131210082700.GE11990@sonymobile.com> References: <1386295805-13708-1-git-send-email-bjorn.andersson@sonymobile.com> <1386295805-13708-3-git-send-email-bjorn.andersson@sonymobile.com> <52A24E08.706@codeaurora.org> <52A63829.10509@codeaurora.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <52A63829.10509@codeaurora.org> Sender: linux-doc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Stephen Boyd Cc: Linus Walleij , Rob Herring , Pawel Moll , Mark Rutland , Stephen Warren , Ian Campbell , Rob Landley , Grant Likely , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" List-Id: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org On Mon 09 Dec 13:37 PST 2013, Stephen Boyd wrote: > On 12/09/13 00:18, Linus Walleij wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 11:22 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote: > >> On 12/05/13 18:10, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > > As the driver is merged I expect fixes to come in as additional patches. > > > >>> Add initial definition of parameters for pinctrl-msm for the msm8x74 > >>> platform. > >> Hmm. We've tried to remove 'x' from our code because it isn't really > >> accurate and leads to more confusion. > > So does this pin controller have a real name in the data sheet? > > We call it TLMM (top-level mode mux). So far there have been three major > revisions of the hardware and 8974 uses the latest version. > The pinctrl-msm.c driver would be the TLMM (v2 and v3) driver... > > > > I usually prefer to name the drivers after the name of the IP > > block rather than the SoC if possible. > > > > Or should it just be named pinctrl-msm.c? > > Leaving the pinctrl-msm.c file as in these patches is fine. For the SoC > specific data files we should use the base chip name which in this case > is 8974. I suppose the goal of pinctrl-msm8x74.c is to support 8974 and > 8074 SoCs in the same file because they're almost exactly the same minus > some pins losing their "modem" functions. Given that, the file names are > fine but the binding and the data structures should be specific about > which SoC we're talking about. ...and the pinctrl-msm8x74.c would be the data for SoCs matching that name. Currently we know that 8074 is a 8974 without modem and the document I have describing this incarnation of the SoC describes 8274, 8674 and 8974. So as Stephen suggest; we could keep the name pinctrl-msm8x74.c as is and we change the compatible to be explicit about this is qcom,msm8974-pinctrl. That would give us room to handle any differences between 8074 and 8974 within this file. What do you say? Should I prepare a patch for this? Regards, Bjorn