From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Walleij Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] pinctrl: iproc: Allow PINCONF to be disabled completely Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2016 10:24:06 +0200 Message-ID: References: <1460506523-6249-1-git-send-email-ray.jui@broadcom.com> <1460506523-6249-5-git-send-email-ray.jui@broadcom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1460506523-6249-5-git-send-email-ray.jui@broadcom.com> Sender: linux-gpio-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Ray Jui Cc: Alexandre Courbot , Rob Herring , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" , bcm-kernel-feedback-list , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 2:15 AM, Ray Jui wrote: > In some of the future iProc based SoCs, pinconf is handled by another > block and the iProc GPIO controller is solely used as a GPIO controller. > This patch adds support of a new compatible string "brcm,iproc-gpio-only", > that is introduced to handle this case, where pinconf functions in this > driver are completely disabled > > Signed-off-by: Ray Jui > Reviewed-by: Yendapally Reddy Dhananjaya Reddy > Reviewed-by: Jon Mason > Reviewed-by: Scott Branden If this was entirely true, then the driver should end up only executing [devm_]gpiochip_add_data() but that does not seem to be the case. You are still registering a pin controller, right? Just disabling some of the pin config options. The pin multiplexing is still there, right? Then it is not "solely a GPIO controller". Not at all. This patch set needs some elaboration I think. Yours, Linus Walleij