Hi Srini, On 03/07/2014 11:41 AM, srinivas kandagatla wrote:
Hi Peppe/Maxime, I missed a comment... :-) On 07/03/14 09:41, Maxime COQUELIN wrote:From: Giuseppe Cavallaro <peppe.cavallaro@xxxxxx> This patch adds a new logic inside the st pinctrl to manage an unsupported scenario: some sysconfig are not available! This is the case of STiH407 where, although documented, the following registers from SYSCFG_FLASH have been removed from the SoC. SYSTEM_CONFIG3040 Output Enable pad control for all PIO Alternate Functions and SYSTEM_ CONFIG3050 Pull Up pad control for all PIO Alternate Functions Without managing this condition an imprecise external abort will be detect. To do this the patch also reviews the st_parse_syscfgs and other routines to manipulate the registers only if actually available. In any case, for example the st_parse_syscfgs detected an error condition but no action was made in the st_pctl_probe_dt. Signed-off-by: Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@xxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Giuseppe Cavallaro <peppe.cavallaro@xxxxxx> --- drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c | 121 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------- 1 file changed, 75 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c index 9e9b6ea..d1886b4 100644 --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c @@ -390,6 +390,19 @@ static const struct st_pctl_data stih416_data = { .alt = 0, .oe = 40, .pu = 50, .od = 60, .rt = 100, }; +static const struct st_pctl_data stih407_flashdata = { + .rt_style = st_retime_style_none, + .input_delays = stih416_delays, + .ninput_delays = 14, + .output_delays = stih416_delays, + .noutput_delays = 14, + .alt = 0, + .oe = -1, /* Not Available */ + .pu = -1, /* Not Available */ + .od = 60, + .rt = 100, +}; +I think this stih407_flashdata go with the previous patch "pinctrl: st: add pinctrl support for the STiH407 SoC" So that this patch just adds new checks to pinctrl-driver and not stih407 related stuff.
Problem is that "oe" and "pu" takes -1 in that patch, and these values will be passed directly to devm_regmap_field_alloc without any check.
I propose to apply this patch before "pinctrl: st: add pinctrl support for the STiH407 SoC", and move stih407_flashdata as you recommend.
Is it fine for you? Thanks for the review, Maxime
Other than that the patch looks good to me.} /* @@ -1583,7 +1612,7 @@ static struct of_device_id st_pctl_of_match[] = { { .compatible = "st,stih407-sbc-pinctrl", .data = &stih416_data}, { .compatible = "st,stih407-front-pinctrl", .data = &stih416_data}, { .compatible = "st,stih407-rear-pinctrl", .data = &stih416_data}, - { .compatible = "st,stih407-flash-pinctrl", .data = &stih416_data}, + { .compatible = "st,stih407-flash-pinctrl", .data = &stih407_flashdata},Same as first comment.{ /* sentinel */ } };Thanks, srini
-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
