From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 1/4] ARM: dts: exynos5420: add i2s controllers Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 14:12:36 +0100 Message-ID: <20130812131235.GX6427@sirena.org.uk> References: <1376302070-1877-1-git-send-email-padma.v@samsung.com> <21180092.af8YMiXtjc@amdc1227> <20130812113447.GW6427@sirena.org.uk> <3916118.YsNJ4NTaJS@amdc1227> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="iuErhZXXTDqxrbLV" Return-path: Received: from cassiel.sirena.org.uk ([80.68.93.111]:50792 "EHLO cassiel.sirena.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756204Ab3HLNND (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Aug 2013 09:13:03 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3916118.YsNJ4NTaJS@amdc1227> Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org To: Tomasz Figa Cc: Padmavathi Venna , linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, padma.kvr@gmail.com, kgene.kim@samsung.com, tomasz.figa@gmail.com, abrestic@chromium.org --iuErhZXXTDqxrbLV Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 01:41:23PM +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote: > On Monday 12 of August 2013 12:34:48 Mark Brown wrote: > > I'd expect that to interact badly with the pinmuxing - unless the device > > is disabled it'll try to grab its pins on probe which is not going to be > > a good idea unless it is actually wired up for use in the system. Or is > > there some other mechanism for handling that? > Ah, good point. Now I wonder whether pinctrl nodes shouldn't be considere= d=20 > board-specific and specified in board-level dts instead? It seems a bit cleaner to use the current mechanism in that it stops the device appearing at all and hence repeated efforts to probe, plus a simple enable is less error prone, the way these SoCs are designed you don't have to pick which pinmux is in use for most of the IPs. Where there are multiple options it does seem like a good approach though. Tastes may differ though. --iuErhZXXTDqxrbLV Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJSCN9AAAoJELSic+t+oim9oNYP/Rwmgv/wJbEGemD8vFcM2b+Y ap33udideatCfv5QAkaG/emt7oMhFN6jSbHT4fa4eHtkt8xSIE/nfs4VyxVsutZr 9ycs8iMNBRpRrxiZ5Dx1tUgjUqEYY+4+63/Hq7w9Q+xCczbB82Ah+ZhQVKE4i2Ws 9+hAxbLQrKlG+SI3/0DB/KCLLAKjR+pUCQeA1chTqSl9uk5egw6jmDKx6lhhHcl3 19USWeuQtHpG7mxxuS3Mz1QCAJSUAAQfWxUnWj9ZEj7ZNgBW8MKSU43EIhZ3Vw59 tMYu1Woms696/I4E7i+5mjmbtxNKQs9aT0RCN/nViYlv8tKA0ReJHw9lVKrAWmvi 6RnpX0vWVT7oK0YiabXVOWykynU2wNjfboYx2eYXcwmGhjmp0Ixlic6JVfipWapu zmyXfbumuE0hyOGcwbS9+NhT/OMkr2XzxGrcFUzfBhZJxtkD5HS3++3GvrXfinBH eNyu8VnWrJL+p/TMnGKfJXFkImzI7d9HdhNvqp2dyyH9/ci1lP6Q9XfGuEGqkHqQ 0xkUczwc0KEc513wUcCru/HZu0KiKXIc3PJQKzoZPag7t7WSzZL1Nv9ogR9lmQH4 Uqytywz8zGlhQeaFhAlcCOHr14F8OjbMl0gAPT8m5h40OfHmIt8246cbqi03JqDm UM3PgiyX3brWb/SDlC9J =2hXy -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --iuErhZXXTDqxrbLV--