From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Roger Quadros Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] pinctrl: dra: dt-bindings: Fix output pull up/down Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2014 16:44:27 +0200 Message-ID: <545794CB.5030802@ti.com> References: <1414752745-13696-1-git-send-email-rogerq@ti.com> <1415009392-6627-1-git-send-email-rogerq@ti.com> <20141103143023.GA8260@kahuna> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20141103143023.GA8260@kahuna> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Nishanth Menon Cc: tony@atomide.com, balbi@ti.com, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 11/03/2014 04:30 PM, Nishanth Menon wrote: > On 12:09-20141103, Roger Quadros wrote: >> For PIN_OUTPUT_PULLUP and PIN_OUTPUT_PULLDOWN we must not set the >> PULL_DIS bit which disables the PULLs. >> >> PULL_ENA is a 0 and using it in an OR operation is a NOP, so don't >> use it in the PIN_OUTPUT_PULLUP/DOWN macros. >> >> Fixes: 23d9cec07c58 ("pinctrl: dra: dt-bindings: Fix pull enable/disable") >> >> Signed-off-by: Roger Quadros >> --- >> include/dt-bindings/pinctrl/dra.h | 4 ++-- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/pinctrl/dra.h b/include/dt-bindings/pinctrl/dra.h >> index 3d33794..7448edf 100644 >> --- a/include/dt-bindings/pinctrl/dra.h >> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/pinctrl/dra.h >> @@ -40,8 +40,8 @@ >> >> /* Active pin states */ >> #define PIN_OUTPUT (0 | PULL_DIS) >> -#define PIN_OUTPUT_PULLUP (PIN_OUTPUT | PULL_ENA | PULL_UP) >> -#define PIN_OUTPUT_PULLDOWN (PIN_OUTPUT | PULL_ENA) >> +#define PIN_OUTPUT_PULLUP (PULL_UP) >> +#define PIN_OUTPUT_PULLDOWN (0) >> #define PIN_INPUT (INPUT_EN | PULL_DIS) >> #define PIN_INPUT_SLEW (INPUT_EN | SLEWCONTROL) >> #define PIN_INPUT_PULLUP (PULL_ENA | INPUT_EN | PULL_UP) > > You are right, we do have an issue with using PIN_OUTPUT along with > remaining setting. > > For a moment, I wondered why input was not impacted - then I realized > that INPUT_EN was being used instead of PIN_INPUT - following that > convention. With the intent being explicitly using macros that > clearly indicate what each setting combination is is, how about the > following? > > > diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/pinctrl/dra.h b/include/dt-bindings/pinctrl/dra.h > index 3d33794..d4037e7 100644 > --- a/include/dt-bindings/pinctrl/dra.h > +++ b/include/dt-bindings/pinctrl/dra.h > @@ -34,14 +34,15 @@ > #define PULL_DIS (1 << 16) > #define PULL_UP (1 << 17) > #define INPUT_EN (1 << 18) > +#define OUTPUT_EN (0 << 18) > #define SLEWCONTROL (1 << 19) > #define WAKEUP_EN (1 << 24) > #define WAKEUP_EVENT (1 << 25) > > /* Active pin states */ > -#define PIN_OUTPUT (0 | PULL_DIS) > -#define PIN_OUTPUT_PULLUP (PIN_OUTPUT | PULL_ENA | PULL_UP) > -#define PIN_OUTPUT_PULLDOWN (PIN_OUTPUT | PULL_ENA) > +#define PIN_OUTPUT (OUTPUT_EN | PULL_DIS) > +#define PIN_OUTPUT_PULLUP (OUTPUT_EN | PULL_ENA | PULL_UP) > +#define PIN_OUTPUT_PULLDOWN (OUTPUT_EN | PULL_ENA) To me it adds more confusion and this change is a NOP as we're ORing 0 here with OUTPUT_EN. > #define PIN_INPUT (INPUT_EN | PULL_DIS) > #define PIN_INPUT_SLEW (INPUT_EN | SLEWCONTROL) > #define PIN_INPUT_PULLUP (PULL_ENA | INPUT_EN | PULL_UP) > cheers, -roger