Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1567208
| From | Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH RESEND] pinctrl: intel: Turn Baytrail support to tristate |
| Date | 2017-01-26 10:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <t3OnM-5wh-21@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <t3xGh-3sb-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <t3O4p-5aO-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo |
On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 09:55:36AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 4:26 PM, Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.de> wrote: > > > The pinctrl-baytrail driver builds just fine as a module so give > > users this option. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.de> > > Cc: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com> > > Cc: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com> > > Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> > > --- > > This was discussed almost one year ago, with no clear conclusion, but > > also no evidence that the driver can't be built as a module. Is there > > any way to push this forward? > > I see ACKs for this patch, but in my git I also have: > > commit 360943a8d26265825025b88da32961bd9ad4f7c6 > pinctrl: baytrail: make it explicitly non-modular > > Acked by Mika. Heh, yeah we even removed possibility to unbind the driver with that commit. Totally forgot that one. > So which one is it going to be? Good question. I'm fine with both but I would really like to get some confirmation that turning the driver to module actually does not break anything. I have one Minnowboard MAX here but it does not do any ACPI magic for GPIOs so testing on that one might not catch all possible issues. > If this should be applied, the previous patch from Paul Gortmaker > should be reverted first. Especially the runtime PM parts seem > important to get back. Runtime PM actually does not do anything - there is no way to power down the GPIO controller in Baytrail. > Then I want a patch reverting that and adding this tristate in one. I agree + really good explanation in the changelog why this was done.
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH RESEND] pinctrl: intel: Turn Baytrail support to tristate Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.de> - 2017-01-25 16:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH RESEND] pinctrl: intel: Turn Baytrail support to tristate Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com> - 2017-01-25 17:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH RESEND] pinctrl: intel: Turn Baytrail support to tristate Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.de> - 2017-01-26 10:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH RESEND] pinctrl: intel: Turn Baytrail support to tristate Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com> - 2017-01-26 10:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH RESEND] pinctrl: intel: Turn Baytrail support to tristate Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.de> - 2017-01-27 10:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH RESEND] pinctrl: intel: Turn Baytrail support to tristate Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> - 2017-01-25 17:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH RESEND] pinctrl: intel: Turn Baytrail support to tristate Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com> - 2017-01-26 09:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH RESEND] pinctrl: intel: Turn Baytrail support to tristate Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> - 2017-01-26 10:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH RESEND] pinctrl: intel: Turn Baytrail support to tristate Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com> - 2017-01-26 10:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH RESEND] pinctrl: intel: Turn Baytrail support to tristate Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de> - 2017-01-26 10:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH RESEND] pinctrl: intel: Turn Baytrail support to tristate Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com> - 2017-01-26 10:40 +0100
csiph-web