From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexandre Belloni Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: at91: spi: request all csgpio in spi probe Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2014 17:59:06 +0200 Message-ID: <20140731155906.GH3214@piout.net> References: <20140728122103.GR9532@piout.net> <53D64ADA.1000102@aksignal.cz> <20140728223859.GA3214@piout.net> <20140729100017.31f0b1be@bbrezillon> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140729100017.31f0b1be@bbrezillon> Sender: devicetree-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Boris BREZILLON Cc: =?utf-8?B?SmnFmcOt?= Prchal , devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, nicolas.ferre-AIFe0yeh4nAAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, voice.shen-AIFe0yeh4nAAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, Mark Brown List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 29/07/2014 at 10:00:17 +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote : > Hi Alexandre, >=20 > > While this solves the particular issue Ji=C5=99=C3=AD is seeing, th= is will not > > solve the case where PA14 (CS0) is not used by the spi driver at al= l. It > > will remained muxed as CS0 and toggle when the spi master needs to > > access CS0 until another driver muxes it to something else. I still > > believe we should explicitly ask pinctrl to mux them as gpios. > >=20 >=20 > Do we really care about this case ? > After all, if a given pin needs a specific muxing during kernel boot > (i.e. a pin connected to a gpio-led that needs to stay in its previou= s > state or a pin connected to the reset line of a device that needs to > stay up and running during kernel boot) the bootloader/bootstrap shou= ld > have muxed this pin appropriately before booting the kernel. >=20 Yeah, you are right. > What do you mean by "we should explicitly ask pinctrl to mux them as > gpios" ? > Do you mean configuring all the pins as GPIOs when the pin controller= is > probed, or just adding a new pinctrl state configuring the pin as an > output GPIO and reference it in the pinctrl-0 property of the spi > controller. >=20 > If the former, you'll break devices that needs their pins to stay in > the state they were during the bootloader/boostrap phase. > The latter won't work if the pin you request as GPIO is later request= ed > by another device (which, if I'm correct, is exactly the case you're > trying to solve). >=20 Again you are right, let's not care about that use case. I still feel that the pinctrl-0 property has to be filled correctly. --=20 Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" i= n the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html