Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754804Ab3FOXws (ORCPT ); Sat, 15 Jun 2013 19:52:48 -0400 Received: from perceval.ideasonboard.com ([95.142.166.194]:38251 "EHLO perceval.ideasonboard.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754729Ab3FOXwr convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sat, 15 Jun 2013 19:52:47 -0400 From: Laurent Pinchart To: Linus Walleij Cc: Heiko =?ISO-8859-1?Q?St=FCbner?= , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Grant Likely , "devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org" , James Hogan , "linux-sh@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [RFC] pinctrl: generic: Add DT bindings Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2013 01:52:59 +0200 Message-ID: <1422045.RvRkWGR9K7@avalon> User-Agent: KMail/4.10.2 (Linux/3.8.13-gentoo; KDE/4.10.2; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <1370988237-30593-1-git-send-email-laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com> <1795038.rqcr6GWLdP@avalon> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1457 Lines: 51 Hi Linus, On Sunday 16 June 2013 01:51:32 Linus Walleij wrote: > On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 1:35 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > On Saturday 15 June 2013 22:16:13 Heiko St?bner wrote: > >> Am Samstag, 15. Juni 2013, 21:56:05 schrieb Linus Walleij: > >> > >> Disable would the be either > >> > >> bias-disable; > >> > >> or > >> > >> bias-pull-up = <0>; > >> > >> A driver should probably handle both, as both are valid pinconf options > >> or this. > > > > I feel a bit uneasy about that. Do we really need to support two different > > ways to achieve the same result ? > > In this specific case I think yes, but not on all options. > > As dicussed earlier this was designed for systems where > you could set the pull-up resistance, like > > bias-pull-up = <600000>; > > would give 600kOhm pull up. > > In most existing systems that is silly, as they can't specify it, so they > should be able to do just: > > bias-pull-up; > > as that is all they can do. If we have to cut one way, we should cut the > former until such a system appears. I'm fine with bias-pull-up = <1>; vs bias-pull-up;. What bothers me a bit is bias-pull-up = <0>; vs bias-disable;. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/