From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Laxman Dewangan Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] pinctrl: tegra: Add DT binding for io pads control Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2016 22:11:42 +0530 Message-ID: <571119C6.6000107@nvidia.com> References: <1460473007-11535-1-git-send-email-ldewangan@nvidia.com> <1460473007-11535-7-git-send-email-ldewangan@nvidia.com> <5710F7A4.5070902@nvidia.com> <5710F6CA.6060700@nvidia.com> <57110560.80004@nvidia.com> <57110558.8010209@nvidia.com> <57110CA4.6050903@nvidia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <57110CA4.6050903@nvidia.com> Sender: linux-gpio-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Jon Hunter , swarren@wwwdotorg.org, thierry.reding@gmail.com, linus.walleij@linaro.org, gnurou@gmail.com, robh+dt@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com Cc: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Friday 15 April 2016 09:15 PM, Jon Hunter wrote: > On 15/04/16 16:14, Laxman Dewangan wrote: >> >> I used pins as this is the property from pincon generic so that I can >> use the generic implementation. >> >> Here, I will not go to the pin level control as HW does not support pin >> level control. >> >> I will say the unit should be interface level. Should we say >> IO_GROUP_CSIA, IO_GROUP_CSIB etc? > So we need to reflect the hardware in device-tree and although yes the > power-down for the CSI_x_xxx pads are all controlled together as a > single group, it does not feel right that we add a pseudo pin called > csix to represent these. > > The CSI_x_xxx pads are already in device-tree and so why not add a > property to each of these pads which has the IO rail information for > power-down and voltage-select? Which dt binding docs have these? I looked for nvidia,tegra210-pinmux.txt and not able to find csi_xxx. Here I dont want to refer the individual pins as control should be as group.