Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 18 Jan 2012 22:30:28 +0800 | Subject | Re: Pinmux bindings proposal | From | Shawn Guo <> |
| |
On 18 January 2012 22:13, Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> wrote: > Hi, > > * Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca> [120116 09:55]: >> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 12:39:42PM -0800, Stephen Warren wrote: >> > pinmux = >> > <"default" &pmx_sdhci_active> >> > <"suspend" &pmx_sdhci_suspend>; >> > >> > /* 1:n example: */ >> > pinmux = >> > <"default" &pmx_sdhci_mux_a> >> > <"default" &pmx_sdhci_pincfg_a> >> > <"suspend" &pmx_sdhci_mux_a> >> > <"suspend" &pmx_sdhci_pincfg_a_suspend>; >> >> >> Yeah, don't do this. Mixing phandle, string and cell values in a >> property gets messy and could become troublesome to parse. I've >> backed away from it in the clk binding. > > Yup, that's because the string is embedded directly into the mixed > mode array and will likely make the following data unaligned. That > means it's extremely flakey to parse, and will lead into horrible > errors if you have typos in the .dts file.. Tried that and gave up > on it. > > I think I've found a way to avoid using names at all, assuming we set > each pin as a phandle for the drivers to use :) > The problem with doing that is we will have to represent each pin as a node in device tree. For imx6q case, we have 197 pins. Doing so will bloat the device tree.
-- Regards, Shawn -- 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/
| |