From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jamie Iles Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 10/12] arm/tegra: Add device tree support to pinmux driver Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2011 21:36:17 +0100 Message-ID: <20110815203617.GB22355@gallagher> References: <1313189697-21287-1-git-send-email-swarren@nvidia.com> <1313189697-21287-11-git-send-email-swarren@nvidia.com> <20110815200716.GA22355@gallagher> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110815200716.GA22355@gallagher> Sender: linux-tegra-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Jamie Iles Cc: Stephen Warren , Grant Likely , Colin Cross , Erik Gilling , Olof Johansson , Russell King , devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-tegra-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 09:07:16PM +0100, Jamie Iles wrote: > Hi Stephen, > > On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 04:54:55PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren > > --- > > arch/arm/mach-tegra/pinmux.c | 115 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 1 files changed, 115 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-tegra/pinmux.c b/arch/arm/mach-tegra/pinmux.c > > index 05fa1a3..33246c2 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-tegra/pinmux.c > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-tegra/pinmux.c > > @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ > > #include > > #include > > #include > > +#include > > #include > > > > #include > > @@ -147,6 +148,41 @@ static const char *func_name(enum tegra_mux_func func) > > return tegra_mux_names[func]; > > } > > > [...] > > > > static const char *tri_name(unsigned long val) > > { > > @@ -666,15 +702,94 @@ void tegra_pinmux_config_pullupdown_table(const struct tegra_pingroup_config *co > > } > > } > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_OF > > +static void __init tegra_pinmux_probe_dt(struct platform_device *pdev) > > +{ > > + int pg; > > + > > + for (pg = 0; pg < TEGRA_MAX_PINGROUP; pg++) { > > + const char *pg_name = pingroup_name(pg); > > + struct tegra_pingroup_config config; > > + struct device_node *pg_node; > > + int ret; > > + const char *s; > > + > > + pg_node = of_find_child_node_by_name(pdev->dev.of_node, > > + pg_name); > > + if (pg_node == NULL) > > + continue; > > + > > + config.pingroup = pg; > > + > > + ret = of_property_read_string(pg_node, "nvidia,function", &s); > > + if (ret < 0) { > > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, > > + "%s: Missing property nvidia,function\n", > > + pg_name); > > + continue; > > + } > > + ret = func_enum(s, &config.func); > > + if (ret < 0) { > > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, > > + "%s: Invalid nvidia,function value %s\n", > > + pg_name, s); > > + continue; > > + } > > + > > + ret = of_property_read_string(pg_node, "nvidia,pull", &s); > > + if (ret >= 0) { > > + if (!strcmp(s, "up")) > > + config.pupd = TEGRA_PUPD_PULL_UP; > > + else if (!strcmp(s, "down")) > > + config.pupd = TEGRA_PUPD_PULL_DOWN; > > + else if (!strcmp(s, "normal")) > > + config.pupd = TEGRA_PUPD_NORMAL; > > + else { > > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, > > + "%s: Invalid nvidia,pull value %s\n", > > + pg_name, s); > > + continue; > > + } > > + } else > > + config.pupd = TEGRA_PUPD_NORMAL; > > + > > + if (of_find_property(pg_node, "nvidia,tristate", NULL)) > > + config.tristate = TEGRA_TRI_TRISTATE; > > + else > > + config.tristate = TEGRA_TRI_NORMAL; > > + > > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "%s: func %d (%s) pull %d tri %d\n", > > + pg_name, config.func, func_name(config.func), > > + config.pupd, config.tristate); > > + > > + tegra_pinmux_config_pingroup(&config); > > + > > + of_node_put(pg_node); > > + } > > +} > > I need to implement DT muxing configuration for my platform, and I believe > that what you have here would work fine for me too, and to avoid duplicating > the same thing, I wonder if this could be a little more generic. > > So if the platform specific pinmux driver called the pinmux parser with a > callback for a pingroup configuration function then this wouldn't need the > nvidia specific properties. I'd envisage the setup callback to be something > like: > > int pingroup_configure(const char *name, unsigned long flags); and it if this took the device_node too then the platform specific bits could handle more esoteric properties if required. I'll have a go at prototyping this tomorrow unless there are any obvious reasons that this is a stupid idea! Jamie