Re: [PATCH 02/03] pinctrl: sh-pfc: r8a7790: Break out USB0 OVC/VBUS

[Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@gmail.com>]

Hi Laurent,

On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 10:17 AM, Laurent Pinchart
<laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> wrote:
> Hi Magnus,
>
> Thank you for the patch.
>
> On Thursday 30 January 2014 08:10:19 Magnus Damm wrote:
>> From: Magnus Damm <damm@opensource.se>
>>
>> Create a new group for the USB0 OVC/VBUS pin by itself. This
>> allows us to monitor PWEN as GPIO on the Lager board.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Magnus Damm <damm@opensource.se>
>> ---
>>
>>  drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a7790.c |    9 +++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
>>
>> --- 0001/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a7790.c
>> +++ work/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a7790.c 2014-01-24
> 10:23:32.000000000
>> +0900 @@ -3231,6 +3231,13 @@ static const unsigned int usb0_pins[] >>  static const unsigned int usb0_mux[] = {
>>       USB0_PWEN_MARK, USB0_OVC_VBUS_MARK,
>>  };
>> +static const unsigned int usb0_ovc_vbus_pins[] = {
>> +     /* OVC/VBUS */
>> +     RCAR_GP_PIN(5, 19),
>> +};
>> +static const unsigned int usb0_ovc_vbus_mux[] = {
>> +     USB0_OVC_VBUS_MARK,
>> +};
>
> Another option would have been to split the existing usb0 group in usb0_pwen
> and usb0_ovc. I'm not sure which is better though, I'd just like to know if
> you had given it a thought.

I actually did just that in my first local attempt, but I decided not
to since it will only cause potential breakage.

> Regardless, what about naming the new group usb0_ovc instead of usb0_ovc_bus
> to keep names short ?

Is there any particular reason why you want shorter names?

From my side, I prefer to keep the names in sync with the data sheet.
In this particular case it is a shared pin so OVC is used for Host
while VBUS is used for gadget, so if you're proposing to ditch VBUS
then this feels somewhat inconsistent with the current gadget use
case. =)

Thanks,

/ magnus