Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] pinctrl: sh-pfc: Add r8a77470 PFC support

[Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Sergei,

Ping?

On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 3:56 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven
<geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 3:48 PM, Biju Das <biju.das@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 11:07 AM, Biju Das <biju.das@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> wrote:
>>> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] pinctrl: sh-pfc: Add r8a77470 PFC support
>>> >> On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 5:22 PM, Biju Das <biju.das@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> wrote:
>>> >> > Add PFC support for the R8A77470 SoC including pin groups for some
>>> >> > on-chip devices such as SCIF, AVB and MMC.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Signed-off-by: Biju Das <biju.das@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> >> > Reviewed-by: Fabrizio Castro <fabrizio.castro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> >> > --- /dev/null
>>> >> > +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a77470.c
>>>
>>> >> > +/* - AVB
>>> >> > +------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >> > +-- */ static const
>>> >> unsigned int avb_link_pins[] = {
>>> >> > +       RCAR_GP_PIN(5, 14),
>>> >> > +};
>>> >> > +static const unsigned int avb_link_mux[] = {
>>> >> > +       AVB_LINK_MARK,
>>> >> > +};
>>> >> > +static const unsigned int avb_magic_pins[] = {
>>> >> > +       RCAR_GP_PIN(5, 15),
>>> >> > +};
>>> >> > +static const unsigned int avb_magic_mux[] = {
>>> >> > +       AVB_MAGIC_MARK,
>>> >> > +};
>>> >> > +static const unsigned int avb_phy_int_pins[] = {
>>> >> > +       RCAR_GP_PIN(5, 16),
>>> >> > +};
>>> >> > +static const unsigned int avb_phy_int_mux[] = {
>>> >> > +       AVB_PHY_INT_MARK,
>>> >> > +};
>>> >> > +static const unsigned int avb_mdio_pins[] = {
>>> >> > +       RCAR_GP_PIN(5, 12), RCAR_GP_PIN(5, 13), }; static const
>>> >> > +unsigned int avb_mdio_mux[] = {
>>> >> > +       AVB_MDC_MARK, AVB_MDIO_MARK, }; static const unsigned int
>>> >> > +avb_mii_pins[] = {
>>> >> > +       RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 14), RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 15), RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 16),
>>> >> > +       RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 27),
>>> >> > +
>>> >> > +       RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 2), RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 3), RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 4),
>>> >> > +       RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 5),
>>> >> > +
>>> >> > +       RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 10), RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 0), RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 1),
>>> >> > +       RCAR_GP_PIN(5, 17), RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 13), RCAR_GP_PIN(5, 23),
>>> >> > +       RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 12),
>>> >> > +};
>>> >> > +static const unsigned int avb_mii_mux[] = {
>>> >> > +       AVB_TXD0_MARK, AVB_TXD1_MARK, AVB_TXD2_MARK,
>>> >> > +       AVB_TXD3_MARK,
>>> >> > +
>>> >> > +       AVB_RXD0_MARK, AVB_RXD1_MARK, AVB_RXD2_MARK,
>>> >> > +       AVB_RXD3_MARK,
>>> >> > +
>>> >> > +       AVB_RX_ER_MARK, AVB_RX_CLK_MARK, AVB_RX_DV_MARK,
>>> >> > +       AVB_CRS_MARK, AVB_TX_EN_MARK, AVB_TX_ER_MARK,
>>> >> > +       AVB_TX_CLK_MARK,
>>> >>
>>> >> You forgot AVB_COL, which is GP5_18?
>>> >
>>> > GP5_18 is shred between the signals AVB_COL and VI0_CLK. As per the
>>> > RZ/G1C board schematic /hardware user guide Ethernet Phy collision
>>> > pin(AVB_COL) pin  is not populated on this board by default. It is populated
>>> only for Video Input Channel0 pixel clock.
>>> >
>>> > Since it is initial submission, I thought of adding only board
>>> > specific pins first and later add this collision pin alone as a
>>> > separate pin entry  in the avb group. That way we can support existing
>>> board as well as any future RZ/G1C board which populates this pin. Are you
>>> ok for this approach?
>>>
>>> Oops. That means our grouping is suboptimal. Perhaps we should revisit (for
>>> all SoCs, while keeping backwards compatibility)?
>>>
>>> After reading some wikipedia, I came up with:
>>>
>>>     mii_tx
>>>     mii_tx_er (optional)
>>>     mii_rx
>>>     mii_col_crs (optional, half duplex)
>>>
>>> However, given your board uses AVB_CRS without AVB_COL, that would still
>>> not be sufficient, so the last group should be split to cover your use case?
>>
>> Ok I agree to your point. What about splitting the last group " mii_col_crs"  to "mii_col" and  "mii_crs" as separate groups .
>> Since this pins are only meaning full in half duplex mode(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media-independent_interface)
>
> Sounds fine to me.
> As COL and CRS are the same for MII and GMII, they can just be named
> avb_col_pins resp. avb_crs_pins.
>
> BTW, Sergei, what's your opinion?
>
>>> BTW, how does it work with AVB_COL not wired to anything by default, and
>>> thus floating? Do you enable pull-up/down for that pin in the PFC, or is the
>>> pin just ignored in full-duplex mode?
>>
>> Since it is unwired, the pin is in GPIO mode, high impedance state(ZU) with initial state is pull-up "on" in the PFC.
>
> OK. But as soon as the VIN is used, it will no longer be configured as GPIO...
>
>>> >> > +};
>>> >> > +static const unsigned int avb_gmii_pins[] = {
>>> >> > +       RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 14), RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 15), RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 16),
>>> >> > +       RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 27), RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 28), RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 29),
>>> >> > +       RCAR_GP_PIN(4, 0), RCAR_GP_PIN(5, 22),
>>> >> > +
>>> >> > +       RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 2), RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 3), RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 4),
>>> >> > +       RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 5), RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 6), RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 7),
>>> >> > +       RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 8), RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 9),
>>> >> > +
>>> >> > +       RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 10), RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 0), RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 1),
>>> >> > +       RCAR_GP_PIN(5, 17), RCAR_GP_PIN(4, 1), RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 11),
>>> >> > +       RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 13), RCAR_GP_PIN(5, 23), RCAR_GP_PIN(3, 12),
>>> >> > +}; static const unsigned int avb_gmii_mux[] = {
>>> >> > +       AVB_TXD0_MARK, AVB_TXD1_MARK, AVB_TXD2_MARK,
>>> >> > +       AVB_TXD3_MARK, AVB_TXD4_MARK, AVB_TXD5_MARK,
>>> >> > +       AVB_TXD6_MARK, AVB_TXD7_MARK,
>>> >> > +
>>> >> > +       AVB_RXD0_MARK, AVB_RXD1_MARK, AVB_RXD2_MARK,
>>> >> > +       AVB_RXD3_MARK, AVB_RXD4_MARK, AVB_RXD5_MARK,
>>> >> > +       AVB_RXD6_MARK, AVB_RXD7_MARK,
>>> >> > +
>>> >> > +       AVB_RX_ER_MARK, AVB_RX_CLK_MARK, AVB_RX_DV_MARK,
>>> >> > +       AVB_CRS_MARK, AVB_GTX_CLK_MARK, AVB_GTXREFCLK_MARK,
>>> >> > +       AVB_TX_EN_MARK, AVB_TX_ER_MARK, AVB_TX_CLK_MARK,
>>> >>
>>> >> You forgot AVB_COL, which is GP5_18?
>>> >
>>> > The same comment as above.
>>>
>>> Likewise:
>>>
>>>     gmii_tx
>>>     gmii_rx
>>>     gmii_col_crs (optional, half duplex; should this be split?)
>>
>> Ok I agree to your point. What about splitting the group " gmii_col_crs"  to "gmii_col" and  "gmii_crs" as separate groups .
>> Since this pins are only for half duplex mode(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media-independent_interface)
>
> OK, same pin group as for mii.

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds
--
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