Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 7 Feb 2012 00:15:30 +0100 | Subject | Re: An extremely simplified pinctrl bindings proposal | From | Linus Walleij <> |
| |
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> wrote:
>> I actually had something like unnamed pins in the early patches >> to register a bunch of anonymous pins ranges, so why not bring >> it back in. > > Yeah it seems that the mux registers should be listed, it might > require a little bit of thinking for cases where one register > controls multiple pins. So maybe we need just a new entry for > mux registers?
I'm not sure if I'm following completely, if this is inside the devicetree-based driver file, would it work to just add a struct dentry * to the pinctrl_desc where you put a per-driver file?
Or maybe add extern void pinctrl_add_debugfs(struct dentry *) that adds a new file to the existing per-driver directory through the core and then have this add that file?
Or did you mean that the core.c should be register-aware?
Yours, Linus Walleij
| |