From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lina Iyer Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND RFC 2/4] drivers: pinctrl: qcom: add wakeup gpio map for sdm845 Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2018 14:04:05 -0600 Message-ID: <20180801200405.GB6422@codeaurora.org> References: <20180801020021.9782-1-ilina@codeaurora.org> <20180801020021.9782-3-ilina@codeaurora.org> <8636vyxyub.wl-marc.zyngier@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8636vyxyub.wl-marc.zyngier@arm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Marc Zyngier Cc: swboyd@chromium.org, evgreen@chromium.org, linus.walleij@linaro.org, bjorn.andersson@linaro.org, rplsssn@codeaurora.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, rnayak@codeaurora.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 01 2018 at 02:42 -0600, Marc Zyngier wrote: >On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 03:00:19 +0100, >Lina Iyer wrote: >> >> Add GPIO to PDC pin map for the SDM845 SoC. >> >> Signed-off-by: Lina Iyer >> --- >> drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-sdm845.c | 76 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 76 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-sdm845.c b/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-sdm845.c >> index 2ab7a8885757..e93660922dc2 100644 >> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-sdm845.c >> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-sdm845.c >> @@ -1277,6 +1277,80 @@ static const struct msm_pingroup sdm845_groups[] = { >> UFS_RESET(ufs_reset, 0x99f000), >> }; >> >> +static struct msm_pinctrl_pdc_map sdm845_wakeup_gpios[] = { > >[huge array] > >> +}; > >Why isn't that array part of the DT? I'd expect other SoCs to >eventually use a similar mechanism, no? > I agree and it should be. One place I am thinking is to add it to the DT definition of PDC controller as a data argument - tlmm: pinctrl@000000{ [...] interrupts-extended = <&pdc 30 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH 1>, <&pdc 31 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH 3>, <&pdc 32 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH 5>, ^ |--- Provide the GPIO for the PDC pin here. }; pdc: interrupt-controller@b220000 { compatible = "qcom,sdm845-pdc"; reg = <0xb220000 0x30000>; qcom,pdc-ranges = <0 512 94>, <94 641 15>, <115 662 7>; #interrupt-cells = <3>; <-------- Increase this from 2 ? interrupt-parent = <&intc>; interrupt-controller; }; Would that be acceptable? Thanks, Lina