Hi Linus Walleij,
Thanks for the feedback.
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 03/13] pinctrl: Add sysfs support
>
> On Mon, Mar 6, 2023 at 10:00 AM Biju Das <biju.das.jz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Add a simple sysfs interface to the generic pinctrl framework for
> > configuring pins for output disable operation.
> >
> > /sys/class/pinctrl/
> > `-- output-disable/
> > |-- configure (w/o) ask the kernel to configure a pin group
> > for output disable operation.
> >
> > echo "<group-name function-name 0 1>" > configure
> >
> > The existing "pinmux-functions" debugfs file lists the pin functions
> > registered for the pin controller. For example:
> >
> > function 0: usb0, groups = [ usb0 ]
> > function 1: usb1, groups = [ usb1 ]
> > function 2: gpt4-pins, groups = [ gpt4-pins ]
> > function 3: scif0, groups = [ scif0 ]
> > function 4: scif2, groups = [ scif2 ]
> > function 5: spi1, groups = [ spi1 ]
> >
> > To configure gpt4-pins for output disable activation by user:
> >
> > echo "gpt4-pins gpt4-pins 0 1" > configure
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Biju Das <biju.das.jz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> You have to run things like this by Greg K-H (adde on To)
>
> > +static struct class pinctrl_class = {
> > + .name = "pinctrl",
> > + .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> > + .dev_groups = pinctrl_groups,
> > +};
>
> Why are you adding a new device class?
>
> IIRC Greg don't like them, we should probably just deal with the devices
> directly on the bus where they are, which also implies some topology search
> etc which is a feature.
I am ok for both,
I thought adding new device class will be more generic and
people can use simple sysfs[1] like pwm for output disable operation
rather than the SoC specific operation[2].
[1]
/sys/class/pinctrl/output-disable/configure
vs
[2]
/sys/devices/platform/soc/11030000.pinctrl/output_disable
Cheers,
Biju
