On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 10:13 AM Biju Das <biju.das.jz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 01/13] pinctrl: core: Add pinctrl_get_device() > > Mon, Mar 06, 2023 at 09:00:02AM +0000, Biju Das kirjoitti: ... > > > Add pinctrl_get_device() to find a device handle associated with a > > > pincontrol group(i.e. by matching function name and group name for a > > > device). This device handle can then be used for finding match for the > > > pin output disable device that protects device against short circuits > > > on the pins. > > > > Not sure I understand the use case. Please, create a better commit message. > > OK, Basically pinmux_enable_setting allows exclusive access of pin to a device. > It won't allow multiple devices to claim a pin. Which is correct. No? Show me the schematics of the real use case for that. The owner of the pin is the host side. I can't imagine how the same pin is shared inside the SoC. Is it broken hardware design? ... > > Also it is missing the explanation why there will be no collisions when > > looking by the same pair of function and group name from different device. > > setting->data.mux will be unique for a pin. So there won't be a collision when > looking by the same pair of function and group name from different device. > > > (Always imagine that you have 2+ same IP blocks on the platform before doing > > any pin control core work. This will help you to design it properly. ) Not sure how the pair function_name group_name makes the device unique. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
