From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christian Ruppert Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] pinmux: Add TB10x pinmux driver Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 14:21:45 +0200 Message-ID: <20131008122145.GA21985@ab42.lan> References: <20130618092516.GC18663@ab42.lan> <1371547751-13873-2-git-send-email-christian.ruppert@abilis.com> <20130805115118.GF20936@ab42.lan> <20130821155751.GB3046@ab42.lan> <5216704F.60007@wwwdotorg.org> <20130828144736.GA7066@ab42.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130828144736.GA7066@ab42.lan> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Stephen Warren Cc: Linus Walleij , Patrice CHOTARD , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Grant Likely , Rob Herring , Rob Landley , Sascha Leuenberger , Pierrick Hascoet , "linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" , Alexandre Courbot , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 04:47:36PM +0200, Christian Ruppert wrote: > On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 02:10:55PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: > [...] > > Pin groups are supposed to be something that represents some property of > > the pinctrl HW itself. So, if you have register "X" bits 3-0 that define > > the mux function for pins 8, 9, 10, and 11, then there really is a pin > > group that exists in HW, and that pin group will still exist with that > > same definition no matter what SoC you put the pinctrl HW into. If this > > changes, it's not the same pinctrl HW module. > > In TB10x, every function can be activated on exactly one pin group, and > Documentation/pinctrl.txt says "If only one possible group of pins is > available for the function, no group name need to be supplied.". > > Maybe the answer to our concrete question of the tb10x driver is thus > renaming the pingrp device tree property of the original patch into > something like function (by which a pin group can be implied)? > > For example: > iomux: iomux@FF10601c { > compatible = "abilis,tb10x-iomux"; > reg = <0xFF10601c 0x4>; > pctl_gpio_a: pctl-gpio-a { > abilis,function = "gpioa"; > }; > pctl_uart0: pctl-uart0 { > abilis,function = "uart0"; > }; > }; > > What do you think? There doesn't seem to be any opposition to this proposal so please find a revised patch set in the follow up. Greetings, Christian