Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:4 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:4;
Date:   Wed, 4 Oct 2023 19:27:38 -0700
From:   Zev Weiss <zev@bewilderbeest.net>
To:     Andrew Jeffery <andrew@codeconstruct.com.au>
Cc:     Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
        Joel Stanley <joel@jms.id.au>, linux-aspeed@lists.ozlabs.org,
        openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: aspeed: Allow changing hardware strap defaults
Message-ID: <f9b5694a-5859-4999-bb2d-0e6a79b35c95@hatter.bewilderbeest.net>
References: <20231004071605.21323-2-zev@bewilderbeest.net>
 <e5f0a67e05cf477bdb4ec6efd9c554f4aaa2cf8b.camel@codeconstruct.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <e5f0a67e05cf477bdb4ec6efd9c554f4aaa2cf8b.camel@codeconstruct.com.au>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Oct 04, 2023 at 06:17:50PM PDT, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
>On Wed, 2023-10-04 at 00:16 -0700, Zev Weiss wrote:
>> Previously we've generally assumed that the defaults in the hardware
>> strapping register are in fact appropriate for the system and thus
>> have avoided making any changes to its contents (with the exception of
>> the bits controlling the GPIO passthrough feature).
>>
>> Unfortunately, on some platforms corrections from software are
>> required as the hardware strapping is simply incorrect for the system
>> (such as the SPI1 interface being configured for passthrough mode when
>> master mode is in fact the only useful configuration for it).  We thus
>> remove the checks preventing changes to the strap register so that the
>> pinctrl subsystem can be used for such corrections.
>
>So the strapping for the SPI1 configuration seems to be prone to
>(copy/paste?) mistakes. Is there evidence that motivates dropping all
>the protection instead of poking a hole for SPI1 like we did for the
>passthrough GPIOs?
>
>I'm still a little attached to the policy that software should be
>beholden to the strapping, and to try to mitigate software mistakes
>given the smattering of bits required to drive the Aspeed pinmux.
>

I have no idea what else might be lurking out there so I took a broader 
(perhaps overly heavy-handed) approach, but the SPI1 mode bits are the 
only ones I've personally encountered being strapped wrong, so sure, I'd 
be fine with just extending the "hole-punch" a bit to add those bits.  
I'll send a v2 doing that shortly.


Thanks,
Zev