Re: [RFC 2/5] dt-bindings: pinctrl: add pic64gx "gpio2" pinmux

Linus Walleij
2025-10-13T10:56:54Z

On Wed, Oct 1, 2025 at 5:47 PM Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> wrote:

> tbh, I found it hard to understand the "line" between using a pinmux
> property and where stuff should be described in groups or functions in a
> driver. What is that line?

There is no such line, basically what I like as pin control maintainer
is what exists in the documentation with groups and functions.

Then various driver maintainers have pushed me around since
day 1 because they think it is much more convenient to just
have some single value to poke into a register.

I have come to accept both because the discussions just
go on forever. I'm not a very stern person, "those are my
principles, if you don't like them, I have others".

Essentially it is a question about what the device tree is for:
is it just for (outline) description and configuration of hardware
for a specific system, i.e. where everything that is not
system-specific should be encoded into the driver, or is it
for dumping all kind of various SoC-specific stuff into, without
abstraction. There is no clear line there either, and that is
part of the problem here.

Yours,
Linus Walleij