This series updates the core device drivers to use mux framework for OMAP4 SDP and PANDA board. It's generated against the linux-omap master branch. It has a dependency on the Benoit's omap4 mux data series. http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-omap/msg38995.html sricharan (5): OMAP4: hsmmc: Initialise the mmc mux pins OMAP4: usb-musb: Initialise the usb mux pins. OMAP4: mcbsp: Initialise the mcbsp mux pins OMAP4: board-4430sdp: Initialise the mcspi mux pins OMAP4: serial: Initialise the uart mux pins arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-4430sdp.c | 20 ++++++++ arch/arm/mach-omap2/devices.c | 83 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ arch/arm/mach-omap2/mcbsp.c | 33 +++++++++++++- arch/arm/mach-omap2/serial.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++ arch/arm/mach-omap2/usb-musb.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++ 5 files changed, 214 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) While doing some internal reviews, there were few debates about existing mux framework usage. I am summarising that discussion here and would like to hear more on this from the community. 1. PAD configuration for all pins should be done in a central place(board file) Pros: a. All pins configured in a central place. Easy to ensure coverage and maintenance. Single place to look for all mux related settings b. Drivers, unless they have run time pad configuration requirements need not worry about muxing. Cons: a. Adds a lot of duplicate data in different board files assuming most of the pins will be connected the same way across different boards. 2. Do PAD configuration independently for each module Pros: a. Avoids repetition of similar data for different boards. b. Gives a knowledge of how pins are configured for a module to the respective owners. c. Pads are not initialised unless they are really needed. Cons: a. Can become difficult to maintain if lot of data tend to be different across boards. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
