On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 8:12 PM, Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 04:07:21PM +0200, Jacopo Mondi wrote: >> + The allowed generic formats for a pin multiplexing sub-node are the >> + following ones: >> + >> + node-1 { >> + pinmux = <PIN_ID_AND_MUX>, <PIN_ID_AND_MUX>, ... ; >> + GENERIC_PINCONFIG; > > What's GENERIC_PINCONFIG? I see this in some other binding docs, but not > used anywhere. If this is a boolean property then get rid of the all > caps. If this is a define, then don't use complex defines that expand to > dts source. I guess it is a wildcard for everything under the heading in "Generic pin configuration node content" in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/pinctrl-bindings.txt I'm all for documenting it properly. It's kind of useful, but I don't know the recent ambtions about being formal with DT bindings. The GPIO bindings are just over the top with BNF notation in its formalism. Dunno what is best here :/ 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