On Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 2:41 PM Light Hsieh <light.hsieh@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Refine mtk_pinconf_set()/mtk_pinconf_get() for backward compatibility to > previous MediaTek's bias-pull usage. > In PINCTRL_MTK that use pinctrl-mtk-common.c, bias-pull setting for pins > with 2 pull resistors can be specified as value for bias-pull-up and > bias-pull-down. For example: > bias-pull-up = <MTK_PUPD_SET_R1R0_00>; > bias-pull-up = <MTK_PUPD_SET_R1R0_01>; > bias-pull-up = <MTK_PUPD_SET_R1R0_10>; > bias-pull-up = <MTK_PUPD_SET_R1R0_11>; > bias-pull-down = <MTK_PUPD_SET_R1R0_00>; > bias-pull-down = <MTK_PUPD_SET_R1R0_01>; > bias-pull-down = <MTK_PUPD_SET_R1R0_10>; > bias-pull-down = <MTK_PUPD_SET_R1R0_11>; > > On the other hand, PINCTRL_MTK_PARIS use customized properties > "mediatek,pull-up-adv" and "mediatek,pull-down-adv" to specify bias-pull > setting for pins with 2 pull resistors. > This introduce in-compatibility in device tree and increase porting > effort to MediaTek's customer that had already used PINCTRL_MTK version. > Besides, if customers are not aware of this change and still write devicetree > for PINCTRL_MTK version, they may encounter runtime failure with pinctrl and > spent time to debug. > > This patch adds backward compatible to previous MediaTek's bias-pull usage > so that Mediatek's customer need not use a new devicetree property name. > The rationale is that: changing driver implementation had better leave > interface unchanged. Are these devicetree bindings upstream, or are these bindings never submitted for inclusion in the official device tree bindings? I don't really want to encourage out-of-tree non-canonical device tree experiments. On the other hand I want running code. I suppose if there is a solid use case for backwards compatibility that also affect independent developers (such as people just hacking around with these devices) then we could add it. Yours, Linus Walleij
