Hi Geert, On Friday, November 16, 2018, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > We can have Geert give his opinion on the topic since it was his > > suggestion to begin with. > > > > > > > I'm sorry this is more work, and again, it might be post-poned imo, > > > provided you drop this change you have introduced here. > > > > Since Geert is the maintainer of the Renesas pinctrl drivers, I'll let > > him decide if I should drop that part for now since only 1 SOC exists > > today. > > I don't have a real preference. > > Two cautions, though: > 1. You do have to remember to increase port_names[], when needed, Given your comment that we always explicitly add SOC support to a driver, even if that just means adding a compatible string, we will always have to edit the driver anyway. > 2. Trying to predict the future may fail, and more driver updates may be > needed when a new variant of this pin controller will be conceived. Very true. I think changing the hard coded RZA2_NPINS into priv->npins was the correct thing to do. Of course the driver name is pinctrl-rza2.c which will be silly if used for other SoCs. But then again...I'm using lots of "rcar" drivers for RZ/A2! Chris
