Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965574AbbFJOP7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Jun 2015 10:15:59 -0400 Received: from avon.wwwdotorg.org ([70.85.31.133]:58286 "EHLO avon.wwwdotorg.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965486AbbFJOOa (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Jun 2015 10:14:30 -0400 Message-ID: <5578465A.9090503@wwwdotorg.org> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 08:14:50 -0600 From: Stephen Warren User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linus Walleij , Nicolas Ferre CC: "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" , Ludovic Desroches , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] get pinctrl more flexible for per pin muxing controllers References: <1430729776-27797-1-git-send-email-ludovic.desroches@atmel.com> <556F01CC.8020305@atmel.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1791 Lines: 40 On 06/10/2015 01:33 AM, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 3:31 PM, Nicolas Ferre wrote: >> Le 04/05/2015 10:56, Ludovic Desroches a écrit : >>> >>> The way pins, groups and functions are tied is too constraining for some >>> controllers. It concerns mainly the ones we don't care about groups and >>> functions, each pin can be muxed to any functions. >>> The goal of these two patches is too remove some of the constraints. >>> >>> I have added the prototype of a pin controller and device tree to show the >>> way I want to use these changes. I couldn't test it on boards using generic >>> pinconf so I am not sure that I don't break something... >>> >>> >>> Ludovic Desroches (4): >>> pinctrl: change function behavior for per pin muxing controllers >>> pinctrl: introduce complex pin description >> >> Linus, >> >> Ludovic sent this series nearly one month ago. It was posted after a RFC >> series on the same topic two months ago. As we don't see any comment on >> neither of them we assume that it's okay to include them. > > It's a quite big patch and I need help reviewing it and thinking of > some possible consequences. > > Stephen, can you give me a hand with this? I don't have the patch in my list archive, which goes back 60 days. Judging purely by the patch description, the patch sounds incorrect. There's nothing in pinctrl that prevents a particular pin controller from supporting all mux functions on all pins or groups. Simply return the same list of functions for every pin. -- 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/