From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Shawn Guo Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] pinctrl: imx: add generic pin config core support Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 19:56:44 +0800 Message-ID: <20170515115643.GQ8471@dragon> References: <1494592686-30967-1-git-send-email-aisheng.dong@nxp.com> <1494592686-30967-2-git-send-email-aisheng.dong@nxp.com> <20170515083500.GL8471@dragon> <20170515105615.GN8471@dragon> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:44030 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752039AbdEOL5I (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 May 2017 07:57:08 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-gpio-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org To: "A.S. Dong" Cc: Andy Duan , Jacky Bai , "linus.walleij@linaro.org" , "stefan@agner.ch" , "linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" , "kernel@pengutronix.de" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 11:16:57AM +0000, A.S. Dong wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Shawn Guo [mailto:shawnguo@kernel.org] > > Sent: Monday, May 15, 2017 6:56 PM > > To: A.S. Dong > > Cc: Andy Duan; Jacky Bai; linus.walleij@linaro.org; stefan@agner.ch; > > linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org; kernel@pengutronix.de; linux-arm- > > kernel@lists.infradead.org > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] pinctrl: imx: add generic pin config core support > > > > On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 08:56:18AM +0000, A.S. Dong wrote: > > > > > @@ -489,17 +547,29 @@ static int imx_pinctrl_parse_groups(struct > > > > device_node *np, > > > > > pin_size = SHARE_FSL_PIN_SIZE; > > > > > else > > > > > pin_size = FSL_PIN_SIZE; > > > > > + > > > > > + if (info->generic_pinconf) > > > > > + pin_size -= 4; > > > > > + > > > > > /* Initialise group */ > > > > > grp->name = np->name; > > > > > > > > > > /* > > > > > - * the binding format is fsl,pins = , > > > > > + * the binding format is pins = , > > > > > > > > This is not correct for generic pinconf bindings. CONIFIG shouldn't > > > > be there. > > > > > > > > > > Yes, that's for legacy stuff. > > > > If that's for legacy bindings, you shouldn't change 'fsl,pins' to 'pins', > > right? > > > > I mean the binding format. > For the legacy format, either the name of 'fsl,pins' or 'pins' is ok. > > But in order to increase the standard 'pins' priority, I change > 'fsl,pins' to 'pins' to make it more explicitly. > > I do can leave "fsl,pins' not changed, but I think the new one > may be better, right? Please leave "fsl,pins' unchanged, and let's use 'fsl,pins' for legacy bindings and 'pins' for new one. Shawn