On 05/08/2012 07:21 AM, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 2:18 PM, John Crispin <blogic@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Implement support for pinctrl on lantiq/xway socs. The IO core found on these >> socs has the registers for pinctrl, pinconf and gpio mixed up in the same >> register range. As the gpio_chip handling is only a few lines, the driver also >> implements the gpio functionality. This obseletes the old gpio driver that was >> located in the arch/ folder. ... >> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/Kconfig b/drivers/pinctrl/Kconfig >> index f73a5ea..a19bac96 100644 >> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/Kconfig >> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/Kconfig >> @@ -30,6 +30,11 @@ config PINCTRL_PXA3xx >> bool >> select PINMUX >> >> +config PINCTRL_LANTIQ >> + bool >> + select PINMUX >> + select PINCONF > > depends on LANTIQ > > ? > > I don't think anyone else is going to want to compile > this. This Kconfig option is selected by the ARCH Kconfig, so only selected at the right time. The user won't get prompted for it since there's no string after "bool". I think this is OK. Tegra's pinctrl Kconfig option doesn't have any "depends ARCH_TEGRA" here either, although I note that many other pinctrl drivers do. >> config PINCTRL_MMP2 >> bool "MMP2 pin controller driver" >> depends on ARCH_MMP >> @@ -83,6 +88,10 @@ config PINCTRL_COH901 >> COH 901 335 and COH 901 571/3. They contain 3, 5 or 7 >> ports of 8 GPIO pins each. >> >> +config PINCTRL_XWAY >> + bool >> + select PINCTRL_LANTIQ > > Shouldn't this be: > > depends on SOC_TYPE_XWAY Maybe, but see comments above. > depends on PINCTRL_LANTIQ Selecting PINCTRL_LANTIQ seems more appropriate; the ARCH Kconfig just selects PINCTRL_XWAY when appropriate, and that then selects anything it depends on. (IIRC, the driver for SOC_TYPE_XWAY uses the driver for LANTIQ, not the other way around?) > So LANTIQ selects it's pinctrl driver, the the xway SoC > selects its driver and they both are dependent on their > respective system.
