Re: [PATCH v4 3/6] pinctrl: baytrail: Update gpio chip operations

[Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 04:08:47PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 1:00 PM, Cristina Ciocan
> <cristina.ciocan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > This patch updates the gpio chip implementation in order to interact with
> > the pin control model: the chip contains reference to SOC data and
> > pin/group/community information is retrieved through the SOC reference.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Cristina Ciocan <cristina.ciocan@xxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Patch applied with Mika's ACK.

Thanks!

> Cristina & Mika, can you provide feedback on a patch I sent last week:
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-gpio&m=145864063724362&w=2
> 
> This makes it possible for a GPIO driver to use native
> open drain if the hardware supports this instead of relying
> on switching the pin to input and thus expecting high impedance.

Looks like a good idea to me. Recent Intel hardware (Skylake, Broxton)
is capable of taking advantage of this. Not sure if Baytrail supports
this at hardware level, though.

> With a backing pin control driver I think that maybe we need
> a pin control back-end performing things like this on behalf
> of the GPIO driver, something like
> pinctrl_gpio_set_config(unsigned gpio, enum pin_config_param param,
> u16 argument);
> 
> So the pin controller can perform config on behalf of the
> GPIO driver (e.g. setting a backing pin to open drain).
> 
> Do you think we will need this?

If I understand this right, GPIO part of the pinctrl driver just calls
pinctrl_gpio_set_config() with correct parameters in its
->set_single_ended() to get the pin to the right mode. So yes, I think
we could use it, at least from Intel pinctrl/GPIO drivers perspective :)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html