From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965083AbbBDJwx (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Feb 2015 04:52:53 -0500 Received: from galahad.ideasonboard.com ([185.26.127.97]:56955 "EHLO galahad.ideasonboard.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964915AbbBDJwu (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Feb 2015 04:52:50 -0500 From: Laurent Pinchart To: Linus Walleij Cc: Laurent Pinchart , Sascha Hauer , Niklas =?ISO-8859-1?Q?S=F6derlund?= , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-sh@vger.kernel.org" , Magnus Damm Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] pinctrl: sh-pfc: Accept standard function, pins and groups properties Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2015 11:53:34 +0200 Message-ID: <12938873.nmb8Ng8mNb@avalon> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.3 (Linux/3.17.7-gentoo; KDE/4.14.3; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <1422390694-12389-1-git-send-email-laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Linus, On Wednesday 04 February 2015 09:40:48 Linus Walleij wrote: > On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 9:31 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > The "function", "pins" and "groups" pinmux and pinctrl properties have > > been standardized. Support them in addition to the custom "renesas,*" > > properties. New-style and old-style properties can't be mixed in DT. > > > > Signed-off-by: Laurent Pinchart > > > > (...) > > >> Would be nice if the PFC driver could be augmented to also accept the > >> now standard bindings "groups" and "function" simply :) we're adding > >> parse functions for those to the core. > > > > Something like this ? > > Yes :) > > > Please note two differences between the Renesas PFC bindings and the > > standard bindings: > > > > - The standard bindings state that a pinctrl node must contain either a > > "pins" property or a "groups" property, while the Renesas bindings > > allows for both to coexist in the same node. > > Sascha also says this makes sense for him so I guess I'm getting a bit > soft on the issue. > > > - The standard bindings don't allow a pinmux node to contain a "pins" > > property, while the Renesas bindings do. > > Does that mean "pins" affect the muxing or that "pins" is about some per-pin > config shoveled into the same node? > > The former is not OK, the latter is. It means "pins" affect the muxing. The sh-pfc driver supports both muxing groups and muxing individual pins. > > mmcif_pins: mmcif { > > > > mux { > > - renesas,groups = "mmc0_data8_0", > > "mmc0_ctrl_0"; > > - renesas,function = "mmc0"; > > + groups = "mmc0_data8_0", "mmc0_ctrl_0"; > > + function = "mmc0"; > > }; > > So that looks just very nice. > > > cfg { > > - renesas,groups = "mmc0_data8_0"; > > - renesas,pins = "PORT279"; > > + groups = "mmc0_data8_0"; > > + pins = "PORT279"; > > bias-pull-up; > > And here I can't see the use of "groups" in this node since it > doesn't match a function. It's a bit ambiguous what "groups" > mean when you run into it like this. It means that the bias-pull-up configuration is applied to all pins of the "mmc0_data8_0" group, as well as to pin 279. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart