From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752886Ab2DMLoU (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Apr 2012 07:44:20 -0400 Received: from mail2.gnudd.com ([213.203.150.91]:62108 "EHLO mail.gnudd.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751402Ab2DMLoT (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Apr 2012 07:44:19 -0400 Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 13:44:02 +0200 From: Alessandro Rubini To: linus.walleij@linaro.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, giancarlo.asnaghi@st.com, alan@linux.intel.com, sameo@linux.intel.com, grant.likely@secretlab.ca, linus.walleij@stericsson.com Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 2/2] gpio: add STA2X11 GPIO block Message-ID: <20120413114402.GA4969@mail.gnudd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Organization: GnuDD, Device Drivers, Embedded Systems, Courses In-Reply-To: References: <5e419c41c8e3bcbeac341aa9457a9c93bc4c8309.1334219874.git.rubini@gnudd.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > I would still prefer to use the pinctrl subsystem for this from day > 1 instead of adding more custom stuff for later refactoring... I see your point. I attacked pinctrl some time ago, but it is overly complex for this simple stuff. We have static configuration that is enacted at boot, and that's it. Using pinctrl would mean much more code (and more bugs, as a side effect) for no real advantage. I appreciate the flexibility of pinctrl, and I see it's really good to have a way to describe complex SoC hardware, but it just isn't always needed. Besides, it's still marked as experimental, which on one side is not reassuring about its stability, and on the other means my whole chipset should depend on experimental as a consequence. thanks /alessandro