Re: [PATCH 02/10] dt-bindings: pinctrl: Add devicetree bindings for DM816x SoC Pinctrl

[Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info>]

[...]
> Sorry, does dm814x.h not look as bindings? I'm a bit confused.

probably also not the ideal placement in bindings.

> FWIW, dm8148-evm.dts is not including the header, dm814x.dtsi is.
> Following 
> 
> Basically PULL_ENA define in omap.h is wrong for DM8168 SoCs. 
> 
> For a better solution, you would prefer:
> - Keep omap.h in dm816x.dtsi
> - Add a variant like DM816X_PULL_{ENA,DIS} in dm816x.h
> - Replace defines in dm8168-evm.dts
> - Add the header in dm8168-evm.dts
> 
> or:
> 
> - Keep omap.h in dm816x.dtsi
> - Add a variant like DM816X_PULL_{ENA,DIS} in omap.h
> - Replace defines in dm8168-evm.dts
> 
Hmm, there is dm8168-evm.dts which uses PULL_UP / PULL_ENA
in nandflash-pins. Do they factor in this inversion? Do you have that board
by chance? We probably need to take the brush there anyways.

If I had my head in some OMAP3/4/5 dts files with non-prefixed
defines, I would probably not object against any PULL_ENA without
DM816X_ in front of it if I am not very awake.

So better do the undef and not use DM816X_ prefixes there.
Maybe rename that file to dm816x-pinctrl.h. That is a bit
inconsistent with the other omap files but at least that inconsistency
can be catched by the compiler.
Other arm32 platforms have things like e.g. nxp/imx/imx6sll-pinfunc.h

Regards,
Andreas