From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tony Lindgren Subject: Re: Pinmux bindings proposal V2 Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 09:51:23 -0800 Message-ID: <20120126175122.GX22818@atomide.com> References: <74CDBE0F657A3D45AFBB94109FB122FF1780DAB4CE@HQMAIL01.nvidia.com> <20120123210052.GS22818@atomide.com> <20120126093610.GD2287@S2101-09.ap.freescale.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120126093610.GD2287-rvtDTF3kK1ictlrPMvKcciBecyulp+rMXqFh9Ls21Oc@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org Sender: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org To: Shawn Guo Cc: Dong Aisheng , "devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org" , "linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , "rob.herring-bsGFqQB8/DxBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org" , "kernel-bIcnvbaLZ9MEGnE8C9+IrQ@public.gmane.org" , "cjb-2X9k7bc8m7Mdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org" , "Sascha Hauer (s.hauer-bIcnvbaLZ9MEGnE8C9+IrQ@public.gmane.org)" , "linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org" List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Hi, * Shawn Guo [120126 00:53]: > > On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 01:00:52PM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote: > ... > > So to summarize: I suggest we'll just stick to basics to get the system > > booting and devices working using device tree. In most cases the device > > drivers should be able to configure the suspend and off states in a generic > > way using pinctrl API. Everything else, like debugging, we can probably > > do with userspace tools. > > > > This would mean just using a minimal subset of your binding, probably > > very close to what you originally suggested. > > > IMHO, as a generic device tree binding, it should be able to cope with > different use cases. It's really free for you to use the minimal > subset of the binding as your need, but we should not make the binding > design just be that minimal subset to force that everyone else can > only use the minimal subset. The main issue I have is that the example posted in this thread repeats the same registers five times for one driver entry alone in the device tree data. The repeated registers are TEGRA_PMX_PG_DTA and TEGRA_PMX_PG_DTD in the example. The alternative values are something that the pinmux/pinconf driver can set based on state changes communicated from the driver using these pins. That's why I think these alternative states should not be listed in the device tree. Regards, Tony