Re: [PATCH v5 01/10] pinctrl: generic: Add bi-directional and output-enable

[Dong Aisheng <dongas86@gmail.com>]

Hi Jmondi,

On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 7:11 PM, jmondi <jacopo@jmondi.org> wrote:
> Hi Dong,
>
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 02:25:08PM +0800, Dong Aisheng wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 5:44 PM, jmondi <jacopo@jmondi.org> wrote:
>> > Fair enough :)
>> >
>> > I'll try to keep this short: I don't like "output-enable", and at the
>> > same time I don't think "output-high" and "output-low" fit well for
>> > this purpose, as they electrically means something different from what
>> > our (and IMX) use case is: enabling/disabling input/output
>> > buffers internal to pin controller/gpio block HW and not driving a value
>> > there.
>> >
>> > This seems clear to me from the "GPIO mode pitfalls" section of
>> > pinctrl.txt documentation examples and from the fact that generic bindings
>> > did not expose an "output" flag because if you drive an output line, you
>> > reasonably either drive it high or low.
>> >
>> > Unfortunately I cannot convince myself that the same reasons apply
>> > to the input use case.  Enabling input on a pin implies the pinctrl/gpio driver
>> > has to enable any input buffer required to use that pin as a properly
>> > working input line, and enabling an input buffer implies being able to sense
>> > the line value from there, so I don't see that much use for "input-buffer-enable"
>> > alone.
>> >
>> > So, even if bindings could look a bit weird as there won't be a direct
>> > matching between properties names used to enable input/output buffers,
>> > my vote is to add "output-buffer-enable" only, and keep using the
>> > already there "input-enable" properties for the input use case.
>> >
>>
>> Yes, it may be a bit weird.
>> I'm not pad internal details expert and can't tell much difference between
>> output-enable and output-buffer-enable.
>> I just feel a bit confuse if only using output-buffer-enable.
>
> Yes it is, and I actually like your proposal, I was just trying to
> make sure I was not confusing the property semantic with its
> real-world effect.
>
> If no one as different opinions on this, I can send a patch later to
> add output-enable only, or since you have almost done it down here you
> can do the same resusing what you have proposed below.

Please feel free to do it.
Just one thing, may be we could also add PIN_CONFIG_OUTPUT_ENABLE
as well.

>>
>> If enable both input and output, it becomes:
>> pinctrl_xxx: gpios_xxx_grp {
>>         pins = <
>>                 ULP1_PAD_PTD0__PTD0
>>         >;
>>         input-enable;
>>         output-buffer-enable;
>>         bias-pull-up;
>> };
>>
>> How about still use output-enable in pairs to input-enable but explain more
>> in comments?
>> Aslo update 'input-enable' comment to 'enable input buffer'.
>> e.g.
>> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinconf-generic.c
>> b/drivers/pinctrl/pinconf-generic.c
>> index 720a19f..96c83a4 100644
>> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinconf-generic.c
>> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinconf-generic.c
>> @@ -172,6 +172,7 @@ static const struct pinconf_generic_params dt_params[] = {
>>         { "input-schmitt-enable", PIN_CONFIG_INPUT_SCHMITT_ENABLE, 1 },
>>         { "low-power-disable", PIN_CONFIG_LOW_POWER_MODE, 0 },
>>         { "low-power-enable", PIN_CONFIG_LOW_POWER_MODE, 1 },
>> +       { "output-enable", PIN_CONFIG_OUTPUT_ENABLE, 1 },
>>         { "output-high", PIN_CONFIG_OUTPUT, 1, },
>>         { "output-low", PIN_CONFIG_OUTPUT, 0, },
>>         { "power-source", PIN_CONFIG_POWER_SOURCE, 0 },
>> diff --git a/include/linux/pinctrl/pinconf-generic.h
>> b/include/linux/pinctrl/pinconf-generic.h
>> index 7620eb1..d30f4fe 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/pinctrl/pinconf-generic.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/pinctrl/pinconf-generic.h
>> @@ -59,9 +59,9 @@
>>   *     which means it will wait for signals to settle when reading inputs. The
>>   *     argument gives the debounce time in usecs. Setting the
>>   *     argument to zero turns debouncing off.
>> - * @PIN_CONFIG_INPUT_ENABLE: enable the pin's input.  Note that this does not
>> - *     affect the pin's ability to drive output.  1 enables input, 0 disables
>> - *     input.
>> + * @PIN_CONFIG_INPUT_ENABLE: enable the pin's input buffer.  Note
>> that this does
>> + *     not affect the pin's ability to drive output.
>> + *     1 enables input, 0 disables input.
>
> I would not mention the "input buffer" here, as enabling input implies enabling
> the buffer if you want to read values from there. Actually I guess
> there may be platforms where buffer enabling may be implicit, so I
> would leave this out and let drivers handle it internally.
>

I'm fine with it.

Regards
Dong Aisheng

>>   * @PIN_CONFIG_INPUT_SCHMITT: this will configure an input pin to run in
>>   *     schmitt-trigger mode. If the schmitt-trigger has adjustable hysteresis,
>>   *     the threshold value is given on a custom format as argument when
>> @@ -73,6 +73,9 @@
>>   *     operation, if several modes of operation are supported these can be
>>   *     passed in the argument on a custom form, else just use argument 1
>>   *     to indicate low power mode, argument 0 turns low power mode off.
>> + * @PIN_CONFIG_OUTPUT_ENABLE: only enable the pin's output buffer, not driving
>> + *     a value.
>> + *     1 enables output buffer, 0 disables output buffer.
>>   * @PIN_CONFIG_OUTPUT: this will configure the pin as an output. Use argument
>>   *     1 to indicate high level, argument 0 to indicate low level. (Please
>>   *     see Documentation/pinctrl.txt, section "GPIO mode pitfalls" for a
>>
>> Or
>> invent both input-buffer-enable and output-buffer-enable and
>> deprecated input-enable?
>>
>> Andy,
>> how about your comments?
>>
>> Regards
>> Dong Aisheng
>>
>> > Thanks
>> >    j
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Yours,
>> >> Linus Walleij