Re: Requesting as a GPIO a pin already used through pinctrl

[Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 10:31 PM, Maxime Ripard
<maxime.ripard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> So no, I really don't think the DT ABI matters here, or at least
> compared to the bug we face and the changes that we would need to make
> in order to fix it. But Mark will probably disagree.

In this case we have to think about that it is a community effort driving
DT standardization for the community, the company Allwinner is not
actively involved.

I think etching DT bindings in stone is for companies shipping products.
Those decisions will affect their internal company culture and therefore
we exercise pressure on them as a standards body. It is a clear message
that they need to work together to standardize and take responsibility for
what they ship.

For community efforts just wanting to have a nice and upstream-compliant
structure on things, the requirements for ABI should be lower. Getting the
community code to even run on the device is a hacker undertaking already
in the first place, and the community is using their precious free time for
this.

Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
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