From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Roger Quadros Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] ARM: OMAP2+: omap_device: add dynamic pinctrl handling Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2013 09:44:36 +0300 Message-ID: <51E78ED4.2020107@ti.com> References: <1374061312-25469-1-git-send-email-grygorii.strashko@ti.com> <51E686C1.8020801@ti.com> <51E68E6C.60100@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <51E68E6C.60100@ti.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org To: Grygorii Strashko Cc: Kevin Hilman , Stephen Warren , Tony Lindgren , devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, Linus Walleij , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 07/17/2013 03:30 PM, Grygorii Strashko wrote: > On 07/17/2013 02:57 PM, Roger Quadros wrote: >> Hi Grygorii, >> >> On 07/17/2013 02:41 PM, Grygorii Strashko wrote: >>> Hi Tony, Kevin >>> >>> This patch series introduces dynamic pinctrl handling in OMAP device framework >>> in the same way as it was before switching to DT. >>> This allow OMAP devices driver's developers to simply add dynamic pinctrl >>> handling for "default", "active", "idle", "sleep" PIN states in their drivers >>> by modifying DT definitions only - no modifications in drivers code are not needed. >>> >> >> Overall I like the idea but can we make a provision for device drivers to override >> this default pin state handling? >> >> The OMAP EHCI driver is one such special case where the wakeup mechanism is tied to pinctrl states >> as it uses IO daisy chaining to implement wakeup. >> So depending on whether wakeup needs to be enabled or not I must be able to chose whether >> I put the pin in just "sleep" state or "sleep with wakeup" state. > > I think, in this case you can't use default behavior and need to define > custom pins states like "sleep_wakeup"/"sleep_no_wakeup" and do not > define pins state with name "sleep', so Device core and OMAP device > framework will not touch your pins. Yes, I think this should be fine. Thanks. cheers, -roger