On 25.06.2024 22:56, Paul Barker wrote:
> On 17/06/2024 13:02, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> Hi Paul,
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 1:33 PM Paul Barker
>> <paul.barker.ct@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> -static u8 rzg3s_pin_to_oen_bit(u32 offset, u8 pin, u8 max_port)
>>> +static u32 rzg3s_read_oen(struct rzg2l_pinctrl *pctrl, u32 caps, unsigned int _pin)
>>> {
>>> - if (pin)
>>> - pin *= 2;
>>> + u32 port = RZG2L_PIN_ID_TO_PORT(_pin);
>>> + u8 pin = RZG2L_PIN_ID_TO_PIN(_pin);
>>
>> It's OK to use RZG2L_PIN_ID_TO_PIN() unconditionally, as RZ/G3S does
>> not have any dedicated pins with the OEN capability, right?
>
> I thought about this a bit and came to the conclusion that no, it's not
> ok.
>
> For RZ/G2L, only mux'd pins have OEN capability (Ethernet TXC/TX_CLK
> only).
>
> For RZ/G3S, OEN capability also exists on XSPI/OCTA pins which are
> dedicated pins. We don't currently support OEN for these pins in the
> driver, but we should put a check in place now to be safe.
Just my preference: I would avoid adding code that is not currently used or
cannot be properly tested.
Thank you,
Claudiu Beznea
> I've done
> this in v3 which I'm about to send...
>
> Thanks,
>
