Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 31 Jan 2012 09:32:22 +0800 | From | Shawn Guo <> | Subject | Re: Pinmux bindings proposal V2 |
| |
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 09:20:42AM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@linaro.org> [120129 17:13]: > > On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 09:05:45AM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote: ... > > > Wouldn't it be cleaner to just clk_get esdhc_clk during init, then > > > do clk_set_rate on it to toggle the rates? > > > > > It's not an init-time switch but run-time one. That said, > > sdhci_ops.set_clock will be called during run-time. > > Right, basically you don't want to do clk_get or pinmux_get during > runtime, you do that once one during init. Then do clk_set_rate or > whaterver during runtime. > > Is there anything stopping from implementing sdhci_ops.set_rate > using clock framework and clk_set_rate in this case BTW? > We are doing this exactly for clk, and trying to figure out how to handle pinctrl here. I do not see how we can do pinmux_get at init-time and pinmux_set_whatever at run-time. The pinmux API does not work that way.
> > > > > So I'd rather stay out of random named states for > > > > > the pins coming from device tree; If we still need them, they should > > > > > be common bindings rather than things like "xyz_clock_hack". > > > > > > > > > The binding defines the syntax, and I do not see the necessity to > > > > force the particular state name, which is really pinctrl client > > > > device specific. > > > > > > Do you have some other custom pin state example other than the > > > clock rate change example above? > > > > > I have another case PM related. To aggressively save power, the pins > > configured for particular function during active mode need to be > > muxed on gpio mode and output 0 in low-power mode. > > OK, but basically only a small subset of pins of the total pins? > Actually, all pins used by the block.
-- Regards, Shawn
| |