On Wed, Dec 04, 2019 at 02:52:59PM +0100, Clément Leger wrote: > > ----- On 4 Dec, 2019, at 13:45, Andy Shevchenko andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 12:13 PM Clement Leger <cleger@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> Since the driver has been moved to pinctrl and now supports it, move the > >> documentation into pinctrl folder. In the same time, add documentation > >> for pinctrl properties such has snps,has-pinctrl and description of pin > >> alternate functions. > > > >> +- snps,has-pinctrl : If present, register the pinctrl controller. > > > > I'm wondering why we can't always assume pin control? > > This hardware IP is configured when instantiated to include support for > muxing. If configured without support, the registers will exists but won't > configure anything. > I guess that it's not really a problem but it will lead to unusable > pin muxing. Can't you determine this by the presence of child nodes? Rob
