Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 16 Sep 2012 11:09:11 +0200 | From | Sebastian Hesselbarth <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 03/10] pinctrl: mvebu: kirkwood pinctrl driver |
| |
On 09/16/2012 09:46 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote: >> +Required properties: >> +- compatible: "marvell,88f6180-pinctrl", >> + "marvell,88f6190-pinctrl", "marvell,88f6192-pinctrl", >> + "marvell,88f6281-pinctrl", "marvell,88f6282-pinctrl" >> + >> +This driver supports all kirkwood variants, i.e. 88f6180, 88f619x, and 88f628 > > The current MPP code determines for itself what chip it is running on. > It can then check if a pin configuration is valid for the current > run time environment. > > Here you are suggesting we have to put into the DT what chip we expect > to be on. > > What is the advantage of this, over getting the information from the > device itself?
Hi Andrew,
there is no advantage over determining the variant on run time except that it is statically and (normally) known at boot time. I understand that mass converting kirkwood to pinctrl would require to know all the different variants.
If there are no objections from the others, I agree to determine the variant from the existing kirkwood_id(). I was just unsure if it is ok to use platform-specific code with DT here.
Any ideas how to get kirkwood_id() linked into pinctrl-kirkwood with the get-rid-of-arch-includes policy?
Sebastian
| |