Hi Linus,
On 4/15/2016 1:24 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 2:15 AM, Ray Jui <ray.jui@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In some of the future iProc based SoCs, pinconf is handled by another
block and the iProc GPIO controller is solely used as a GPIO controller.
This patch adds support of a new compatible string "brcm,iproc-gpio-only",
that is introduced to handle this case, where pinconf functions in this
driver are completely disabled
Signed-off-by: Ray Jui <ray.jui@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Yendapally Reddy Dhananjaya Reddy <yendapally.reddy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Jon Mason <jon.mason@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Scott Branden <scott.branden@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
If this was entirely true, then the driver should end up only executing
[devm_]gpiochip_add_data() but that does not seem to be the case.
Yes, in the case of compatible string "brcm,iproc-gpio-only" is
detected, the driver only registers 'gpiochip_add_data'. Please check
patch 2/4 of this series, which takes care of it.
You are still registering a pin controller, right? Just disabling some of
the pin config options. The pin multiplexing is still there, right?
Then it is not "solely a GPIO controller". Not at all.
This driver does not register itself as a PINCONF driver if
"brcm,iproc-gpio-only" compatible string is detected. This is addressed
in patch 2/4 of this series.
Pin based IOMUX GPIO override is only activated when
'chip->pinmux_is_supported' is true, and it is only true if the optional
DT property "gpio-ranges" is defined.
This patch set needs some elaboration I think.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
I believe the current issue with this patch series is now only on the
naming of the new compatible string "brcm,iproc-gpio-only". Please
correct me if I'm wrong.
Thanks,
Ray
--
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
