Hi Linus, On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 11:19:52AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 2:25 AM, Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > So far all the Allwinner pinctrl drivers provided a table in the > > kernel to describe all the pins and the link between the pinctrl functions > > names (strings) and their respective mux values (register values). > > > > Extend the binding to put those mappings in the DT, so that any SoC can > > describe its pinctrl and GPIO data fully there instead of relying on > > tables. > > This uses a generic compatible name, to be prepended with an SoC > > specific name in the node. > > > > Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@xxxxxxx> > (...) > > I definately want feedback from Maxime before I do anything with > this patch series. So I've been opposed to it as well, for the reasons Rob, Thierry and you pointed out already in that thread I just wasn't sure what your opinion on it was, so I didn't answer just so that I could see if I was the only one pushing back. So I guess we all agree here. Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
