Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 14 Apr 2014 10:52:26 +0300 | From | Mathias Nyman <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] pinctrl: add Intel BayTrail GPIO/pinctrl support |
| |
On 04/12/2014 01:54 AM, Timur Tabi wrote: > On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 6:33 AM, Mathias Nyman > <mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com> wrote: >> >> Pins may be muxed to alternate function instead of gpio by firmware. >> This driver does not touch the pin muxing and expect firmare >> to set pin muxing and pullup/down properties properly. >> >> Signed-off-by: Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com> >> --- >> drivers/pinctrl/Kconfig | 12 + >> drivers/pinctrl/Makefile | 1 + >> drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-baytrail.c | 543 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > I know it's been ten months since you posted this driver, but I have a > question. If this driver does not touch the pin muxing, and it > doesn't even call pinctrl_register(), then why is it in > drivers/pinctrl? It's not a pinctrl driver. Why isn't this a regular > GPIO drivers in drivers/gpio? >
This was the conclusion we reached after some discussion with Linus W. Initially this was just a GPIO driver, but Linus correctly spotted that Baytrail has many pinctrl-like features (like pin muxing, etc) that we might need to address in the future.
threads where this was discussed:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=136994203308585&w=2 http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=137113578604763&w=2
-Mathias
| |