Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1200483 > unrolled thread

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] New Atmel PIO4 pinctrl/gpio driver

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] New Atmel PIO4 pinctrl/gpio driver Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de> - 2015-08-05 09:40 +0200
    Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] New Atmel PIO4 pinctrl/gpio driver Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com> - 2015-08-10 09:00 +0200

#1200483 — Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] New Atmel PIO4 pinctrl/gpio driver

On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 05:08:07PM +0200, Ludovic Desroches wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Following our discussion, I send an RFC version of my driver. RFC because it is
> not totally achieved, some cleanup and feature addition is needed.
> 
> At least, we could discuss about the 'core' part. I have used the pinmux
> property as Mediatek driver. Patch 3 is the internal dt files we are using.

As you can imagine I am fine with the binding, so I can add my acked-by
once you send a non-RFC version.

The only thing I never understood is what's so special about GPIOs that
they have to bypass the pinctrl framework and instead a gpio_request
magically translates a gpio into a pin. Wouldn't it make sense to at
least add the pins in their GPIO mode to
arch/arm/boot/dts/sama5d2-pinfunc.h?

Sascha

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |
--
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/

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1203847

Hi Sascha,

On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 09:31:17AM +0200, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 05:08:07PM +0200, Ludovic Desroches wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Following our discussion, I send an RFC version of my driver. RFC because it is
> > not totally achieved, some cleanup and feature addition is needed.
> > 
> > At least, we could discuss about the 'core' part. I have used the pinmux
> > property as Mediatek driver. Patch 3 is the internal dt files we are using.
> 
> As you can imagine I am fine with the binding, so I can add my acked-by
> once you send a non-RFC version.
>

Great, I'm glad to hear that.
 
> The only thing I never understood is what's so special about GPIOs that
> they have to bypass the pinctrl framework and instead a gpio_request
> magically translates a gpio into a pin.

Not sure to really understand your concern here... Do you mean I could
get rid of gpio_request_enable()?

> Wouldn't it make sense to at
> least add the pins in their GPIO mode to
> arch/arm/boot/dts/sama5d2-pinfunc.h?

It is done, PIN_PA0 could be used for this purpose.

Regards

Ludovic
--
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/

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web