[lkml]   [2012]   [Feb]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 11/20] pinctrl: Downgrade pinctrl_get warning when no maps are found
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 02:51:55PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 7:45 AM, Stephen Warren <> wrote:
> > This may be perfectly legitimate. An IP block may get re-used
> > across SoCs. Not all of those SoCs may need pinmux settings for the
> > IP block, e.g. if one SoC dedicates pins to that function but
> > another doesn't. The driver won't know this, and will always
> > attempt to set up the pinmux. The mapping table defines whether any
> > HW programming is actually needed.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <>
> This is equivalent to providing dummy pincontrollers as was on my
> TODO for a while admittedly.
> For consistency with regulators it would maybe be better to have
> optional dummy pin controllers but after thinking a bit about it
> I think this is more helpful, so I applied it anyway.
> However I would invite more opinions...
I do not have an opinion on how we do it, and my opinion is just we
need to have it. So,

Acked-by: Shawn Guo <>


 \ /
  Last update: 2012-02-22 06:43    [W:0.089 / U:0.772 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site