From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Heiko =?ISO-8859-1?Q?St=FCbner?= Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/9] ARM: dts: imx6sl: remove the use of pingrp macros Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 11:42:11 +0100 Message-ID: <8644666.oTYOihNRNU@phil> References: <1390668191-20289-1-git-send-email-shawn.guo@linaro.org> <5923680.sl3G3EgCsY@phil> <20140128112047.GC20583@S2101-09.ap.freescale.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20140128112047.GC20583-rvtDTF3kK1ictlrPMvKcciBecyulp+rMXqFh9Ls21Oc@public.gmane.org> Sender: devicetree-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Shawn Guo , linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, Stephen Warren , Ian Campbell , Rob Herring Cc: arm-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Russell King - ARM Linux , kernel-bIcnvbaLZ9MEGnE8C9+IrQ@public.gmane.org, mark.rutland-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday, 28. January 2014 19:20:49 Shawn Guo wrote: > On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 11:17:22AM +0100, Heiko St=FCbner wrote: > > [... and so on for the other groups ... ] > >=20 > > I'm confused now :-) . Current linux-next [0] shows the pin-setting= s as > > part of imx6sl.dtsi - a way a lot of other architectures organize t= heir > > pingroups too, with the board file only referencing the relevant > > pingroups from the predefined ones of the soc. > >=20 > > So I guess your move to the pingrp-header moved them out of the > > imx6sl.dtsi to the .h and is not part of linux-next; >=20 > Yes, my for-next branch was excluded from linux-next temporarily for > some reason. I will ask Stephen to add it back once v3.14-rc1 is out= =2E > That said, you can see nothing we developed in this cycle on linux-ne= xt > for now. >=20 > > but this patch (and the others in this > > series) now moves the definitions into the individual board files. = Can't > > you just move them back to the soc-dtsi files to prevent each board > > duplicating them? >=20 > No. That will bring back the problem we try to solve from the > beginning [1]. > > [1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/275912/ Thanks for the pointer, I think I understand the issue now :-) . So for the short term, I should probably also define the pingroups in m= y board- dts then. But as an insane idea that I just had, because the issue will probably = affect=20 more architectures at some point when their pingroups or other common-n= odes=20 grow, how about introducing something like a "/delete-if-unreferenced/"= prefix=20 in dtc? As I could see in [0], adding something to dtc is not as far off as I t= hought. In essence one would add the pingroups to the soc dtsi, like ecspi1 { /delete-if-unreferenced/ pinctrl_ecspi1_1: ecspi1grp-1 { fsl,pins =3D < MX6SL_PAD_ECSPI1_MISO__ECSPI1_MISO 0x100b1 MX6SL_PAD_ECSPI1_MOSI__ECSPI1_MOSI 0x100b1 MX6SL_PAD_ECSPI1_SCLK__ECSPI1_SCLK 0x100b1 >; }; }; and dtc would then be tasked with checking if the node gets referenced = in a=20 phandle somewhere in the dts and if not removing it. I don't know if this is at all sane to think about or doable in dtc. Heiko [0] http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg300936.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" i= n the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html