From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D929E279329; Thu, 14 May 2026 18:57:46 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778785066; cv=none; b=JGGD9aTgJce8rxDzFkQCb5ggWS95cWZpSvw1FQuTOpkDVBiGsCgFIWBksBmFvXCIJIuHdfStfBnAMnzXv/IsvzwrUopeVGMLJyG/lKde4PDAYSedhVOMLz5HO2n0djDssgPHq+nhLhcuhfMwJdiYmxBl0C5rrn4ACeOFR+zjZA8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778785066; c=relaxed/simple; bh=+FM6hA+10TTi7iU5PA1MKulFrGwvHU/KyYs1Y/Opk94=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=TYn/lh/jiNHwh0eg+kPXS7QPlJNfP5ISRl2Em7mmOgiId28OQE4TYc4gzH1YMWCa4Dw3TQsYf+V0Scps4I2S7gSJUsGCAAwXKToaXAop4f4ZIZu/MetA1Dnddak6KxlaZ7zedwb3wkY25oNaMnYlMT2a2qq3/kFgio2kYgXxN+8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=G9hhLWKF; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="G9hhLWKF" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EC839C2BCB3; Thu, 14 May 2026 18:57:44 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1778785066; bh=+FM6hA+10TTi7iU5PA1MKulFrGwvHU/KyYs1Y/Opk94=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=G9hhLWKFWIVd/foKe6YYx5dv48kqWpysPUwK0LZaP2I6dy8uvNUrOTrO4ou/DI/Gh K8EfpuI6Giwo5ewulsKBJndXG1ZHWIBC00Sozh+uYZ9BNSdX5fHP2bU7HdewyFn+ob wqNma7qU8Go0tOaOI+MFH6xJcyTqd+UJmFbXkwEHoiGUVHYrGAitb8gKfmX9Livtjk 1NwWSFYxZIl24oyNV5mOmSZvmYUPOM4q21yKkF6+UdDEgxUJ7T9Ttk+6bbD6Fc+yBh dxhEhIfSfgIWb+c1FzrU6BNkAqjK1/ljPPuEFGF2PaIZ7R+muuRyG/6v0MJX7w7WrL iqmeHGRYKtvmw== Date: Thu, 14 May 2026 19:57:42 +0100 From: Conor Dooley To: Linus Walleij Cc: Conor Dooley , Yixun Lan , Troy Mitchell , linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, spacemit@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [RFC v1 0/4] generic pinmux dt_node_to_map implementation Message-ID: <20260514-used-revival-306ddced4ab8@spud> References: <20260506-energize-dramatize-051909e54256@spud> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="G1HwXNExfpOqsnk7" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: --G1HwXNExfpOqsnk7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, May 11, 2026 at 10:23:16PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Wed, May 6, 2026 at 11:58=E2=80=AFAM Conor Dooley w= rote: >=20 > > Whipped this up last week, at to a first glance it appears to work, > > although the spacemit platform I've used to implement this has very > > limited in-tree use of pinctrl so it is hard to be sure. >=20 > I like it, if it wasn't RFC I would merge it. Half the reason that it is RFC is that I knew dlan wanted to take a look but told me they weren't available, so I said I'd send it on the list in the interim. > > What I don't love though is how similar the functions > > pinctrl_generic_pins_function_dt_node_to_map() and > > pinctrl_generic_pinmux_dt_node_to_map() are - essentially identical > > other than which function they in turn call. >=20 > Hm we can maybe think of something more descriptive > to the first one? I think the name is actually okay, it was the similarity of the code that I don't like. There's a fair bit of duplication. > I think the new function is very much to the point. That's what > it does. pinctrl_generic_pins_function_dt_node_to_map() could > perhaps be names something that make it evident what is > special about it. Not that I have a good idea. >=20 > > Basically, I wanna know if you think that that is acceptable, >=20 > Looks Good To Me (TM) no-one else is helping out with pin > control core work so I'm happy for everything I get. Right, well I'll go clean it up I suppose. I might send a rfc v2 with an extra patch that tries to get rid of some of the code duplication and you can tell me which version you prefer? --G1HwXNExfpOqsnk7 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEABYKAB0WIQRh246EGq/8RLhDjO14tDGHoIJi0gUCagYbJgAKCRB4tDGHoIJi 0pQuAQDdsm05Tu6s305sA0AF4zcLSMo5WeLpHnAmao/S4UXj2AD/VgBbmKWYI8YG d3/lbYthJp15vGrtvCrbRjMd8nqi2Q4= =CZj+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --G1HwXNExfpOqsnk7--