Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 24 Nov 2011 01:25:38 +0800 | Subject | Re: bug of gpio transition in pinmux driver | From | Haojian Zhuang <> |
| |
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 1:13 AM, Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com> wrote: > Haojian Zhuang wrote at Wednesday, November 23, 2011 6:13 AM: >> Hi Linus & Stephen, >> >> There's a bug in pinmux driver. We can request gpio via >> pinmux_request_gpio(@gpio). @gpio is the gpio number. >> >> In pinmux_request_gpio(): >> pin = @gpio - range->base; >> pin_request(pin); >> >> This pin is the index of pinctrl_pin_desc[]. What's the definition of >> pinctrl_pin_desc's index? It's the index of PAD, not GPIO. Since the >> goal of pinmux_request_gpio() is to avoid define too much gpio groups. >> We need to add the transition between gpio and pad. It's clear that >> the transition of "pin = @gpio - range->base" can't fit every silicon. > >> Especially, one gpio can be routed to two pads in PXA silicon. > > That particular case isn't really covered yet; we've been discussing how > to solve that case; see: > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/11/21/370 > > -- > nvpublic > >
Thanks a lot for your quick reply. If you could cc linux-arm-kernel mailist for the later discussion of pinmux, it would be better.
Best Regards Haojian -- 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/
| |