Re: [PATCH 5/5] dt-bindings: pinctrl: dw: move sps,dwapb-gpio.txt to pinctrl

[Clément Leger <cleger@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Rob, 

Indeed, I could do that if you think that's a better option. Andy however suggested to always register a pinctrl controller.
Both options suits me. Let me know what option you want me to implement.

Thanks,

Clément

----- On 16 Dec, 2019, at 22:39, Rob Herring robh@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 04, 2019 at 02:52:59PM +0100, Clément Leger wrote:
>> 
>> ----- On 4 Dec, 2019, at 13:45, Andy Shevchenko andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> 
>> > On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 12:13 PM Clement Leger <cleger@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Since the driver has been moved to pinctrl and now supports it, move the
>> >> documentation into pinctrl folder. In the same time, add documentation
>> >> for pinctrl properties such has snps,has-pinctrl and description of pin
>> >> alternate functions.
>> > 
>> >> +- snps,has-pinctrl : If present, register the pinctrl controller.
>> > 
>> > I'm wondering why we can't always assume pin control?
>> 
>> This hardware IP is configured when instantiated to include support for
>> muxing. If configured without support, the registers will exists but won't
>> configure anything.
>> I guess that it's not really a problem but it will lead to unusable
>> pin muxing.
> 
> Can't you determine this by the presence of child nodes?
> 
> Rob