Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] arm64: dts: nuvoton: Add pinctrl support for ma35d1

[Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 30/11/2023 02:10, Jacky Huang wrote:
> Dear Krzysztof,
> 
> 
> On 2023/11/29 下午 06:54, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 29/11/2023 11:14, Jacky Huang wrote:
>>> Dear Krzysztof,
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2023/11/29 下午 06:02, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> On 29/11/2023 10:41, Jacky Huang wrote:
>>>>> Dear Krzysztof,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2023/11/29 下午 04:11, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>>> On 29/11/2023 04:35, Jacky Huang wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Krzysztof
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yes, it did pass the 'dtbs_check'. I guess the tool does not detect such
>>>>>>>>> issues.
>>>>>>>>> Anyway, I will fix it in the next version.
>>>>>>>> Hm, I see your bindings indeed allow pin-.* and unit addresses, so it is
>>>>>>>> the binding issue.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The examples you used as reference - xlnx,zynqmp-pinctrl.yaml and
>>>>>>>> realtek,rtd1315e-pinctrl.yaml - do not mix these as you do.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't understand why do you need them yet. I don't see any populate of
>>>>>>>> children. There are no compatibles, either.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Which part of your driver uses them exactly?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>> Krzysztof
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I will move the 'pcfg_default: pin-default' from dtsi to dts, like this:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> &pinctrl {
>>>>>>>         pcfg_default: pin-default {
>>>>>>>             slew-rate = <0>;
>>>>>>>             input-schmitt-disable;
>>>>>>>             bias-disable;
>>>>>>>             power-source = <1>;
>>>>>>>             drive-strength = <17100>;
>>>>>>>         };
>>>>>> This solves nothing. It's the same placement.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>> Krzysztof
>>>>>>
>>>>> OK, it stil be the binding issues.
>>>>> For "^pin-[a-z0-9]+$", I reference to the "pcfg-[a-z0-9-]+$" of
>>>>> rockchip,pinctrl.yaml.
>>>>>
>>>>> My intention is to describe a generic pin configuration, aiming to make
>>>>> the pin
>>>>> description more concise. In actual testing, it proves to be effective.
>>>> Can you instead respond to my actual questions?
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Krzysztof
>>>>
>>> The the last one item of nuvoton,pins is a phandle, which can refer to
>>> '&pin-default'. The following code of driver pinctrl-ma35.c parse
>>> "nuvoton,pins", including the node reference by phandle. list =
>>> of_get_property(np, "nuvoton,pins", &size); size /= sizeof(*list); if
>>> (!size || size % 4) { dev_err(npctl->dev, "wrong setting!\n"); return
>>> -EINVAL; } grp->npins = size / 4; grp->pins = devm_kzalloc(npctl->dev,
>>> grp->npins * sizeof(*grp->pins), GFP_KERNEL); if (!grp->pins) return
>>> -ENOMEM; pin = grp->settings = devm_kzalloc(npctl->dev, grp->npins *
>>> sizeof(*grp->settings), GFP_KERNEL); if (!grp->settings) return -ENOMEM;
>>> for (i = 0, j = 0; i < size; i += 4, j++) { struct device_node
>>> *np_config; const __be32 *phandle; pin->offset = be32_to_cpu(*list++) *
>>> MA35_MFP_REG_SZ_PER_BANK + MA35_MFP_REG_BASE; pin->shift =
>>> (be32_to_cpu(*list++) * MA35_MFP_BITS_PER_PORT) % 32; pin->muxval =
>>> be32_to_cpu(*list++); phandle = list++; if (!phandle) return -EINVAL;
>>> np_config = of_find_node_by_phandle(be32_to_cpup(phandle)); ret =
>>> pinconf_generic_parse_dt_config(np_config, NULL, &pin->configs,
>>> &pin->nconfigs); if (ret) return ret; grp->pins[j] =
>>> npctl->info->get_pin_num(pin->offset, pin->shift); pin++; } Best
>>> Regards, Jacky Huang
>> Sorry, I cannot parse it.
>>
>> I was referring to the children with unit addresses. I don't see any
>> populate of the children, so why do you need them?
>>
>> There are no compatibles, either.
>>
>> Which part of your driver uses them exactly?
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Krzysztof
>>
> So, I should update the binding from "^pin-[a-z0-9]+$" to something like 
> "-pincfg$".
> Just remove the unit address part, and it will become:
> 
>      default-pincfg {
>          slew-rate = <0>;
>          input-schmitt-disable;
>          bias-disable;
>          power-source = <1>;
>          drive-strength = <17100>;
>      };
> 

No, it solves nothing. Instead of pasting more code, can you answer my
questions?

Best regards,
Krzysztof