From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751153AbdEaIfY (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 May 2017 04:35:24 -0400 Received: from mail-lf0-f66.google.com ([209.85.215.66]:33674 "EHLO mail-lf0-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750992AbdEaIfV (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 May 2017 04:35:21 -0400 Date: Wed, 31 May 2017 10:35:23 +0200 From: Johan Hovold To: Linus Walleij Cc: Johan Hovold , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Peter Chen , Rob Herring , Arnd Bergmann , Sricharan R , Zhang Rui , Eduardo Valentin , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-usb@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] driver core: fix automatic pinctrl management Message-ID: <20170531083523.GD6735@localhost> References: <20170530162554.26159-1-johan@kernel.org> <20170530162554.26159-5-johan@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 02:39:28AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 6:25 PM, Johan Hovold wrote: > > > Commit ab78029ecc34 ("drivers/pinctrl: grab default handles from device > > core") added automatic pin-control management to driver core by looking > > up and setting any default pinctrl state found in device tree while a > > device is being probed. > > Actually we do not just support device tree, but also passing pin control > states from board files. It is handled by the core all the same. > So it's not a device tree thing. > > One of those days we will have ACPI passing state tables too... > > But I understand what you mean. Yes, I could have mentioned board files, but this problem only applies to device-tree descriptions (for the time being at least). > > Fix this by checking the new of_node_reused flag and skipping automatic > > pinctrl configuration during probe if set. > > Seems like a solid idea. I hope we don't need another quirk for ACPI. We should be able to just generalise and rename the flag (or add a second one) if it turns out ACPI needs this too. > Acked-by: Linus Walleij Thanks, Johan