Thomas and Tomasz, I'm trying to get my head wrapped around the state of pinctrl for exynos5250. I see various patches that have floated around at times but it doesn't look like anything has landed. It would be really nice to get this resolved since I think it blocks getting eint support landed for exynos5250 and that blocks getting many peripherals working on the ARM Chromebook. I'm still a little new to the world on pinctrl so hopefully nothing below is too stupidly wrong... --- Patches that seem to be relevant (NOTE: all of these need "pinctrl-exynos5250" fixed to "exynos5250-pinctrl"): pinctrl: exynos: add exynos5250 SoC specific data - https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1871901/ gpio: samsung: skip gpiolib registration if pinctrl support is enabled for exynos5250 - https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1871911/ arm: exynos: skip wakeup interrupt registration for exynos5250 if pinctrl is enabled - https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1871921/ ARM: dts: add pinctrl nodes for Exynos5250 SoC - https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1871991/ --> NOTE: Appears to be missing pinctrl_1 and pinctrl_2. That prevents me from compiling with i2c arbitration patches landed since I need gpf0. --> NOTE: Appears (IIRC) to have incorrect interrupt for pinctrl_3. I believe that 45 is pinctrl_1. Maybe 3 is 47? --> NIT NOTE: It appears sd0_busN is strangely specified. Specifically sd0_bus4 includes the pins for sd0_bus1 but sd0_bus8 doesn't. --- I've got all of the above patches "fixed up" in my local tree (including adding really basic support for pinctrl_1 and pinctrl_2). ...but my machine doesn't boot all the way. I think that's because many of the peripherals don't yet understand pinctrl. Specifically I get delightful looking error messages at bootup that look like: [ 0.440000] _gpio_request: gpio-36 (i2c-bus) status -16 [ 0.445000] s3c-i2c s3c2440-i2c.0: gpio [36] request failed I then replaced some of the "muxing via GPIO" with "muxing via pinctrl" for i2c parts, like: - gpios = <&gpb3 0 2 3 0>, - <&gpb3 1 2 3 0>; + pinctrl-0 = <&i2c0_bus>; + pinctrl-names = "default"; ...and I got rid of those errors, but it looks like we're missing pinctrl support for the ever-important "dw_mmc". [ 0.910000] Synopsys Designware Multimedia Card Interface Driver [ 0.915000] dwmmc_exynos dw_mmc.0: Using internal DMA controller. [ 0.920000] dwmmc_exynos dw_mmc.0: DW MMC controller at irq 107, 32 bit host data width, 128 deep fifo [ 0.930000] of_get_named_gpio_flags exited with status 40 [ 0.935000] of_get_named_gpio_flags: can't parse gpios property [ 0.940000] dwmmc_exynos dw_mmc.0: invalid gpio: -2 [ 0.945000] dwmmc_exynos: probe of dw_mmc.0 failed with error -22 We also need it for "spi-s3c64xx.c" but that's less of a critical component. [ 0.405000] of_get_named_gpio_flags exited with status 18 [ 0.410000] /spi@12d30000: could not get #gpio-cells for /pinctrl@11400000/i2c0-bus [ 0.415000] of_get_named_gpio_flags: can't parse gpios property [ 0.420000] s3c64xx-spi exynos4210-spi.1: invalid gpio[1]: -22 [ 0.425000] s3c64xx-spi: probe of exynos4210-spi.1 failed with error -16 Those are the drivers that have their muxing state defined using the old hacky samsung gpio descriptor. Hmmm, it also looks like I need to update other "gpio" references too (gpio-keys, i2c-arbitrator, hpd-gpio) since the GPIO specifier has changed now that it's based on pinmux. I guess you either need to move a whole architecture (all of exynos5250) at once since you can't mix and match. IMHO that means we've got the following work ahead of us: 1. Add pinctrl support to dw_mmc-exynos (with backward compability for GPIO specifier) 2. Add pinctrl support to spi-s3c64xx.c (with backward compability for GPIO specifier) 3. In one fell swoop convert all exynos5 dts / dtsi files over to use pinctrl since things will be broken with a "half" conversion. Assuming I'm understanding #3 above, I guess that means that I "NAK" the "ARM: dts: add pinctrl nodes for Exynos5250 SoC" patch since it doesn't include fixup for all of the exynos5250 platforms (smdk5250 and snow) out there. --- I'd appreciate any thoughts that you have. I'd also appreciate a timeframe for when this work will be picked back up, since the old patches are 2.5 months old now... I may be able to help a little (especially with bits relevant to the ARM Chromebook) but I'm not sure I can do all of the heavy lifting... ...and I'd hate to rebase/repost Thomas's patches myself without checking... NOTE: I've actually hacked something together that seems to get dw_mmc happy with pinmuxing and I can boot the system, so I guess that proves that the above can't all be wrong. ;) Thanks much and sorry for the super long email! :) -Doug -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 |