On Wed, 29 Sep 2021 20:05:42 +0100, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 6:56 PM Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > From: Mark Kettenis <kettenis@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Add pinctrl nodes corresponding to the gpio,t8101 nodes in the > > Apple device tree for the Mac mini (M1, 2020). > > > > Clock references are left out at the moment and will be added once > > the appropriate bindings have been settled upon. > > > > Signed-off-by: Mark Kettenis <kettenis@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210520171310.772-3-mark.kettenis@xxxxxxxxx > (...) > > + pinctrl_ap: pinctrl@23c100000 { > > + compatible = "apple,t8103-pinctrl", "apple,pinctrl"; > > + reg = <0x2 0x3c100000 0x0 0x100000>; > > + > > + gpio-controller; > > + #gpio-cells = <2>; > > + gpio-ranges = <&pinctrl_ap 0 0 212>; > > In other discussions it turns out that the driver is abusing these gpio-ranges > to find out how many pins are in each pinctrl instance. This is not the > idea with gpio-ranges, these can be multiple and map different sets, > so we need something like > > apple,npins = <212>; > (+ bindings) > > or so... Is it the driver that needs updating? Or the binding? I don't really care about the former, but the latter is more disruptive as it has impacts over both u-boot and at least OpenBSD. How is that solved on other pinctrl blocks? I can't see anyone having a similar a similar property. Thanks, M. -- Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
