Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1566206502-4347-1-git-send-email-mars.cheng@mediatek.com>
 <1566206502-4347-7-git-send-email-mars.cheng@mediatek.com> <CAGp9LzoVwNxY8Q3G4hxpa7=orsEox+J0mNamag70wyjrGvDiZw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGp9LzoVwNxY8Q3G4hxpa7=orsEox+J0mNamag70wyjrGvDiZw@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Date:   Fri, 23 Aug 2019 10:59:08 +0200
Message-ID: <CACRpkdbZY2vZBaEXDMsjLxA1NGYWirhCdspu0W-foXJX=Fd4yg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/11] pinctrl: mediatek: add pinctrl support for
 MT6779 SoC
To:     Sean Wang <sean.wang@kernel.org>
Cc:     Mars Cheng <mars.cheng@mediatek.com>,
        Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
        CC Hwang <cc.hwang@mediatek.com>,
        Loda Chou <loda.chou@mediatek.com>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support" 
        <linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, wsd_upstream@mediatek.com,
        mtk01761 <wendell.lin@mediatek.com>,
        linux-clk <linux-clk@vger.kernel.org>,
        Andy Teng <andy.teng@mediatek.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 8:12 PM Sean Wang <sean.wang@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 2:22 AM Mars Cheng <mars.cheng@mediatek.com> wrote:
> >
> > This adds MT6779 pinctrl driver based on MediaTek pinctrl-paris core.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mars Cheng <mars.cheng@mediatek.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Andy Teng <andy.teng@mediatek.com>
>
> Acked-by: Sean Wang <sean.wang@kernel.org>

Please look at the DT bindings as well when you have time, and
especially the "virtual GPIO" patch, I don't understand that at all.

I suspect the "virtual GPIO" is maybe more about something that
should be done by setting up the valid_mask in the gpio_chip
or something.

Yours,
Linus Walleij