On Friday 15 April 2016 09:15 PM, Jon Hunter wrote:
On 15/04/16 16:14, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
I used pins as this is the property from pincon generic so that I can
use the generic implementation.
Here, I will not go to the pin level control as HW does not support pin
level control.
I will say the unit should be interface level. Should we say
IO_GROUP_CSIA, IO_GROUP_CSIB etc?
So we need to reflect the hardware in device-tree and although yes the
power-down for the CSI_x_xxx pads are all controlled together as a
single group, it does not feel right that we add a pseudo pin called
csix to represent these.
The CSI_x_xxx pads are already in device-tree and so why not add a
property to each of these pads which has the IO rail information for
power-down and voltage-select?
Which dt binding docs have these?
I looked for nvidia,tegra210-pinmux.txt and not able to find csi_xxx.
Here I dont want to refer the individual pins as control should be as group.
--
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
