On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 2:44 AM Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Compared to my previous effort almost exactly five years ago [1], this
> new version drops the idea of describing the pinctrl data entirely in
> the DT, instead it still relies on driver provided information for that.
(...)
> On the DT side all that would be needed is *one* extra property per
> pin group to announce the mux value:
>
> uart0_pb_pins: uart0-pb-pins {
> pins = "PB9", "PB10";
> function = "uart0";
> pinmux = <2>;
> };
So what you need to do is to convince the device tree people that this
is a good idea.
For me as linux maintainer it's no big deal, it's fine either way. The new
code looks elegant.
But from a DT point of view this needs to make sense also for Windows
and BSD, so that is who you have to convince. If it is possible to derive
the same information from the compatible string (like today) that will
need an extended argument why all operating systems will benefit from
this.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
