On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 03:26:26PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
> However, my patch is talking about a different thing. For example, we
> have a device whose pinctrl-0 consists of two phandle entries that point
> to pin configuration nodes foo and bar.
>
> pinctrl-0 = <&foo &bar>;
>
> foo {
> ...
> };
>
> bar {
> ...
> };
>
> My patch only wants to make it clear that the configuration specified by
> node foo will be applied to pin controller first, and the configuration
> defined in node bar will be applied after that. When both nodes have
> configuration for a pin, these two configs for the same pin go to two
> different pinctrl_setting structures. And these two pinctrl_settings
> can not be applied accumulatedly but only sequentially. That's what my
> patch talks about.
I still say this is a potentially dangerous thing, and in my case of
overriding the DAT3 pull-sense, it will cause the pin to glitch if
nothing is connected to it.
So even if you do get this clarified, I am *not* happy to change my
patch.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
