From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tony Lindgren Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: Add simple pinmux driver using device tree data Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2012 16:55:39 -0800 Message-ID: <20120204005539.GI20333@atomide.com> References: <20120203205049.4089.74610.stgit@kaulin.local> <20120203205508.4089.35304.stgit@kaulin.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-arm-kernel-bounces@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org To: Linus Walleij Cc: Dong Aisheng , Stephen Warren , Linus Walleij , Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Haojian Zhuang , Grant Likely , Thomas Abraham , Shawn Guo , Rajendra Nayak , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Dong Aisheng List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org * Linus Walleij [120203 14:18]: > On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 9:55 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > Add simple pinmux driver using device tree data. > > > > Currently this driver only works on omap2+ series of > > processors, where there is either an 8 or 16-bit mux > > register for each pin. Support for other similar pinmux > > controllers could be added. > > So since it's not named pinctrl-omap I guess you intend it > to be fully generic for simple muxes, which is nice! > If people start ACK:ing this I will be happy with it too, > because it's very easy to understand. Yes the idea is that it should stay generic. I don't know how easy or hard it would be to enhance it to support also other type mux cases, like multiple mux registers per pin, but I guess we'll see. > > Note that this patch does not yet support pinconf_ops > > or GPIO. Further, alternative mux modes are not yet > > handled. > > Do you want to evolve the patch for these features > or do you want to refactor it in later? Well I'd like to test it a bit more first as I've only done minimal testing so far. So maybe let's assume there will be one more iteration at least. Regards, Tony