On 11/29/2017 09:01 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@xxxxxxxxx> [171102 23:18]: >> It may happen that a device needs to force applying a state, e.g: >> because it only defines one state of pin states (default) but loses >> power/register contents when entering low power modes. Add a >> pinctrl_dev::flags bitmask to help describe future quirks and define >> PINCTRL_FLG_FORCE_STATE as such a settable flag. > > It makes sense to tag the existing state with the context loss > information as otherwise we'll be duplicating the state in the > pinctrl driver potentially for hundreds of pins. > > Maybe this patch description should clarify that it's the > pinctrl device restoring the pin state, not the pinctrl > consumer devices? > > So maybe just "a pinctrl device needs to force apply a state" > instead of just device above? It's a bit more involved than that, the pinctrl consumer device might want to restore a particular state by calling pinctrl_select_state(), however, because of the (p->state == state)check, the pinctrl provider driver has no chance of making that call do the actual HW programming. -- Florian -- 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
