On 5/30/23 10:56, Conor Dooley wrote:
On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 10:38:30AM +0200, Alexandre TORGUE wrote:
Hi Conor
On 5/29/23 20:04, Conor Dooley wrote:
On Mon, May 29, 2023 at 06:20:25PM +0200, Alexandre Torgue wrote:
Add stm32mp257 pinctrl support.
diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/stm32/pinctrl-stm32.h b/drivers/pinctrl/stm32/pinctrl-stm32.h
index e0c31c4c8bca..5e5de92ddd58 100644
--- a/drivers/pinctrl/stm32/pinctrl-stm32.h
+++ b/drivers/pinctrl/stm32/pinctrl-stm32.h
@@ -24,6 +24,9 @@
#define STM32MP_PKG_AB BIT(1)
#define STM32MP_PKG_AC BIT(2)
#define STM32MP_PKG_AD BIT(3)
+#define STM32MP_PKG_AI BIT(8)
+#define STM32MP_PKG_AK BIT(10)
+#define STM32MP_PKG_AL BIT(11)
Mainly out of curiosity, why have you go duplicate defines for these?
Mainly to fit with available packages for various STM32 MPU. Currently MP1
SoCs are available with packages AB/AC/AD and MP2 series with AI/AK/AL but
in the future we could have package AB/AC/AD/AI available for a particular
SoC and then I need to anticipate this case.
Sorry, what I meant was "why have you got defines for these in this
header, when there is an existing set in
include/dt-bindings/pinctrl/stm32-pinfunc.h?".
Ok, I see. To be honest I do it as we did in the past for STM32 MCU and
MP1 products. We had this discussion maybe 5 or 6 years ago about the
fact to include or not the "dt-bindings" file in the stm32 drivers. I
don't remember exactly the rational behind our choice. It is something
that we could improve for all our STM32 products. Sorry for this
imprecise answer.
Alex
Cheers,
Conor.
