Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 21 Apr 2023 10:47:49 +0100 | From | Cristian Marussi <> | Subject | Re: [RFC v1 1/2] scmi: Introduce pinctrl SCMI protocol driver |
| |
On Fri, Apr 21, 2023 at 11:28:38AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Fri, Apr 21, 2023 at 10:40 AM Oleksii Moisieiev > <Oleksii_Moisieiev@epam.com> wrote: > > On 17.04.23 05:55, Peng Fan wrote: > > > On 4/13/2023 6:04 AM, Cristian Marussi wrote: > > > > Is it possible to extend the spec to support multilple uint32_t for PIN > > > CONFIG SET? > > > > > > With only one uint32_t could not satisfy i.MX requirement. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Peng. > > > > > IIUC you are expecting to have an ability to set some kind of array of > > uint32_t config values to some specific ConfigType? > > > > I'm not sure if it's supported by pintctrl subsystem right now. I was > > unable to find an example in the existing device-tree pinctrl bindings. > > This makes me think that this kind of binding is OEM specific. > > > > Maybe it can be implemented by adding new IDs to OEM specific range > > (192-255) which is reserved for OEM specific units (See Table 23 of > > DEN0056E). >
Hi Linus,
> From a pinctrl point of view I do not understand this requirement. > > The pinctrl subsystem in the Linux kernel certainly does not support > an array of u32 for the pin config, we only support passing a single > u32 value along with the enumerator (config type), or well it is > actually 24 bits in Linux, the uppermost 8 bits is for the config type: > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/include/linux/pinctrl/pinconf-generic.h > > /* > * Helpful configuration macro to be used in tables etc. > */ > #define PIN_CONF_PACKED(p, a) ((a << 8) | ((unsigned long) p & 0xffUL)) > > p = parameter (PIN_CONFIG_DRIVE_STRENGTH etc) > a = argument (value such as in mA) >
My (possibly wrong) reasoning on the other reply, is based on the (possibly equally wrong :D) understanding that what Peng wants is just the possibility at the spec and the SCMI protocol layer (exposed in protocol operations) to issue PINCTRL_SET requests containing optionally an array of multiple ConfigType/Value pairs (which is anyway not supported by PinCtrl as I understand) instead of a single pair.
... but I can divine (:D)....that soon a new SCMI spec review/comment/amend cycle will be coming for people reading this...
Thanks, Cristian
| |