* Drew Fustini <drew@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [200527 22:20]:
> On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 09:51:22AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > * Drew Fustini <drew@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [200526 12:22]:
> > > Hello Haojian and Linus,
> > >
> > > For pcs_parse_one_pinctrl_entry() in drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c,
> > > I see that num_maps is set to 2 if PCS_HAS_PINCONF is enabled:
> > >
> > > 1057 if (PCS_HAS_PINCONF && function) {
> > > 1058 res = pcs_parse_pinconf(pcs, np, function, map);
> > > 1059 if (res)
> > > 1060 goto free_pingroups;
> > > 1061 *num_maps = 2;
> > > 1062 } else {
> > > 1063 *num_maps = 1;
> > > 1064 }
> > > 1065 mutex_unlock(&pcs->mutex);
> > >
> > > git blame shows me that came from 9dddb4df90d13:
> > > "pinctrl: single: support generic pinconf"
> > >
> > > Would you be able to provide any insight as to num_maps needs to be 2
> > > when pinconf is enabled?
> >
> > Only slightly related, but we should really eventually move omaps to use
> > #pinctrl-cells = <2> (or 3) instead of 1, and pass the pinconf seprately
> > from the mux mode.
>
> Thanks for the insight, Tony.
>
> I was not considering the situation where pinctrl-cells would be more
> than 1.
>
> I see now from pinctrl-single.txt bindings doc that:
>
> - #pinctrl-cells : number of cells in addition to the index, set to 1
> for pinctrl-single,pins and 2 for pinctrl-single,bits
>
> I am now wondering if it wrong for me to expect compatible string of
> "pinconf-single" to work with pinctrl-cells of 1.
Ideally the #pinctrl-cells would be what makes sense for the
hardware. However, I'm guessing pinctrl-single.c needs patching
for that to happen.
> I see that arch/arm/boot/dts/da850.dtsi has:
>
> 154 pmx_core: pinmux@14120 {
> 155 compatible = "pinctrl-single";
> 156 reg = <0x14120 0x50>;
> 157 #pinctrl-cells = <2>;
> 158 pinctrl-single,bit-per-mux;
>
> and arch/arm/boot/dts/keystone-k2l.dtsi has:
>
> 108 k2l_pmx: pinmux@2620690 {
> 109 compatible = "pinctrl-single";
> 110 reg = <0x02620690 0xc>;
> 111 #address-cells = <1>;
> 112 #size-cells = <0>;
> 113 #pinctrl-cells = <2>;
> 114 pinctrl-single,bit-per-mux;
Yeah so there's also the "bit-per-mux" variant. That should not
affect #pinctrl-cells use, we just need to make it more flexible.
> > We already treat them separately with the new
> > AM33XX_PADCONF macro, so we'd only have to change one SoC at a time to
> > use updated #pinctrl-cells. But I think pinctrl-single might need some
> > changes before we can do that.
>
> Do you mean that it would be possible to make the change just for AM335x
> to start with?
Yes. So ideally we'd just fix up whatever is needed in pinctrl-single.c,
then just set #pinctrl-cells = <2> in am33xx-l4.dtsi, and update the
AM33XX_PADCONF accordingly.
> Do you think the changes would be limited to pinctrl-single.c and the
> associated device tree files like am33xx-l4.dtsi ?
Yes that should be the case. There should be no need to churn the board
specific dts files now that we have AM33XX_PADCONF.
Regards,
Tony
