On Tue, 2014-11-18 at 09:25 -0800, S?ren Brinkmann wrote: > On Tue, 2014-11-18 at 10:50AM +0200, Ivan T. Ivanov wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2014-11-11 at 15:53 +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 8:05 PM, Soren Brinkmann > > > brinkmann at xilinx.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Additionally to the generic DT parameters, allow drivers to > > > > provide driver-specific DT parameters to be used with the > > > > generic parser infrastructure. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Soren Brinkmann brinkmann at xilinx.com> > > > > > > I like the looks of this, but the patch description is a bit > > > terse. I'd like it to describe some of the refactorings being > > > done > > > to the intrinsics, because I have a hard time following the > > > patch. > > > > > > First please rebase onto the "devel" branch in the pin control > > > tree, and notice that drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-spmi-gpio.c > > > which is merged there is actually doing this already: > > > > > > > > > for_each_child_of_node(np_config, np) { > > > ret = pinconf_generic_dt_subnode_to_map(pctldev, > > > np, map, > > > &reserv, > > > nmaps, type); > > > if (ret) > > > break; > > > > > > ret = pmic_gpio_dt_subnode_to_map(pctldev, np, > > > map, &reserv, > > > nmaps, type); > > > if (ret) > > > break; > > > } > > > > > > So it should be patched to illustrate the point of this code. > > > > > > > I like the idea, but have issues with implementations :-). > > > > It is supposed that additional parameters are not generic, > > otherwise they will be part of enum pin_config_param, right? > > > > Probably it will be better if clients could pass array with > > driver specific dt bindings to pinconf_generic_dt_node_to_map()? > > My idea was to hide that API from the driver. You just pass those > parameters as part of the struct pctldev and the parser - whether > this generic one or anything else - would do the right thing. I > don't think calling the parser from the driver is the right approach. Drivers already know about dt_node_to_map(). My proposal will make drivers, which register non-standard bindings, little bit simpler. With your approach probably we can remove dt_node_to_map() and dt_free_map() callbacks? Regards, Ivan