From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Maxime Coquelin Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] pinctrl: st: Enhance the controller to manage unavailable registers Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2014 09:34:36 +0100 Message-ID: <5319849C.2000804@st.com> References: <1393589841-6634-1-git-send-email-maxime.coquelin@st.com> <1393589841-6634-4-git-send-email-maxime.coquelin@st.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-doc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Linus Walleij Cc: Rob Landley , Rob Herring , Pawel Moll , Mark Rutland , Ian Campbell , Kumar Gala , Russell King , Srinivas Kandagatla , Stuart Menefy , Giuseppe Cavallaro , "linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , kernel@stlinux.com, Lee Jones List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 03/07/2014 04:10 AM, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 8:17 PM, Maxime COQUELIN wrote: > >> From: Giuseppe Cavallaro >> >> This patch adds a new logic inside the st pinctrl to manage >> an unsupported scenario: some sysconfig are not available! >> >> This is the case of STiH407 where, although documented, the >> following registers from SYSCFG_FLASH have been removed from the SoC. >> >> SYSTEM_CONFIG3040 >> Output Enable pad control for all PIO Alternate Functions >> and >> SYSTEM_ CONFIG3050 >> Pull Up pad control for all PIO Alternate Functions >> >> Without managing this condition an imprecise external abort >> will be detect. >> >> To do this the patch also reviews the st_parse_syscfgs >> and other routines to manipulate the registers only if >> actually available. >> In any case, for example the st_parse_syscfgs detected >> an error condition but no action was made in the >> st_pctl_probe_dt. >> >> Signed-off-by: Maxime Coquelin >> Signed-off-by: Giuseppe Cavallaro > > Hm this does not apply to my tree at all. It appears this is not > a stand-alone, patch, so it depends on some other patch to > pinctrl-sti? Yes, it depends on patch 2 of the series (which is based on v3.14-rc4). This is my mistake, the title of patch 2 is wrong: ARM: STi: add pinctrl support for the STiH407 SoC Should be: pinctrl: st: add pinctrl support for the STiH407 SoC I will resend the pinctrl patches rebased on your tree. Thanks, Maxime > > Yours, > Linus Walleij >