From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> To: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org> Cc: "Heiko Stübner" <heiko@sntech.de>, "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "Grant Likely" <grant.likely@linaro.org>, "Rob Herring" <rob.herring@calxeda.com>, "devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org" <devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org>, "James Hogan" <james.hogan@imgtec.com>, "Laurent Pinchart" <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] pinctrl: clarify some dt pinconfig options Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 11:51:32 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <CACRpkdbKOWEjnkzY2zGOqWPQ7okBjhK4=QR0tHhJYQa42nefXQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <51C22C5F.5020402@wwwdotorg.org> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 12:10 AM, Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org> wrote: > On 06/14/2013 09:42 AM, Heiko Stübner wrote: >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/pinctrl-bindings.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/pinctrl-bindings.txt > >> -low-power-mode - low power mode >> +low-power-enable - enable low power mode >> +low-power-disable - disable low power mode > > Hmmm. That's changing the binding definition. What if somebody already > wrote their device tree according previous definition? It's not merged so see it as alterations to a WIP in the turners workshop or something. > It seems to be that tri-states are preferable for pinctrl DT: > > no entry: do nothing > = 0: disable > = 1: enable Better with explict enable/disable strings instead of <0> or <1> I think, but the semantic effect would be the same I guess, the upside with *enable/*disable strings is that we do not have to handle cases like tristate = <2>; ... >> +Arguments for parameters: >> + >> +- bias-pull-up, -down and -pin-default take as optional argument 0 to disable >> + the pull, on hardware supporting it the pull strength in Ohm. bias-disable >> + will also disable any active pull. > > Does this agree with the latest definition of the kernel-internal > meaning of 0 for pull-up/down? No that is wrong. Heiko, care to fix this binding doc? >> +- input-schmitt takes as argument the adjustable hysteresis in a >> + driver-specific format >> + >> +- input-debounce takes the debounce time as argument or 0 to disable debouncing >> + >> +- power-source argument is the custom value describing the source to select >> + >> +- slew-rate takes as argument the target rate in a driver-specific format > > If those things have driver-specific (note: should be > DT-binding-specific, not driver-specific) values, then I'm not convinced > that having a generic parameter name for them is a good idea; it makes > things look the same when they aren't. By forcing each binding to > include the vendor prefix on those properties and hence define a custom > property name, you're making it clear that the semantics may be different. Hmmm I don't think they're used right now, let's deal with them when we have something to showcase them with. Patches to delete the unclear bindings will be considered... Yours, Linus Walleij
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: linus.walleij@linaro.org (Linus Walleij) To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: [PATCH 2/5] pinctrl: clarify some dt pinconfig options Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 11:51:32 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <CACRpkdbKOWEjnkzY2zGOqWPQ7okBjhK4=QR0tHhJYQa42nefXQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <51C22C5F.5020402@wwwdotorg.org> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 12:10 AM, Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org> wrote: > On 06/14/2013 09:42 AM, Heiko St?bner wrote: >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/pinctrl-bindings.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/pinctrl-bindings.txt > >> -low-power-mode - low power mode >> +low-power-enable - enable low power mode >> +low-power-disable - disable low power mode > > Hmmm. That's changing the binding definition. What if somebody already > wrote their device tree according previous definition? It's not merged so see it as alterations to a WIP in the turners workshop or something. > It seems to be that tri-states are preferable for pinctrl DT: > > no entry: do nothing > = 0: disable > = 1: enable Better with explict enable/disable strings instead of <0> or <1> I think, but the semantic effect would be the same I guess, the upside with *enable/*disable strings is that we do not have to handle cases like tristate = <2>; ... >> +Arguments for parameters: >> + >> +- bias-pull-up, -down and -pin-default take as optional argument 0 to disable >> + the pull, on hardware supporting it the pull strength in Ohm. bias-disable >> + will also disable any active pull. > > Does this agree with the latest definition of the kernel-internal > meaning of 0 for pull-up/down? No that is wrong. Heiko, care to fix this binding doc? >> +- input-schmitt takes as argument the adjustable hysteresis in a >> + driver-specific format >> + >> +- input-debounce takes the debounce time as argument or 0 to disable debouncing >> + >> +- power-source argument is the custom value describing the source to select >> + >> +- slew-rate takes as argument the target rate in a driver-specific format > > If those things have driver-specific (note: should be > DT-binding-specific, not driver-specific) values, then I'm not convinced > that having a generic parameter name for them is a good idea; it makes > things look the same when they aren't. By forcing each binding to > include the vendor prefix on those properties and hence define a custom > property name, you're making it clear that the semantics may be different. Hmmm I don't think they're used right now, let's deal with them when we have something to showcase them with. Patches to delete the unclear bindings will be considered... Yours, Linus Walleij
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-24 9:51 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 61+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2013-06-14 15:41 [PATCH 0/5] pinctrl: fix some issues with new pinconfig dt parsing Heiko Stübner 2013-06-14 15:41 ` Heiko Stübner 2013-06-14 15:41 ` Heiko Stübner 2013-06-14 15:42 ` [PATCH 1/5] pinctrl: update the documentation for some pinconfig params Heiko Stübner 2013-06-14 15:42 ` Heiko Stübner 2013-06-14 15:42 ` Heiko Stübner 2013-06-16 10:26 ` Linus Walleij 2013-06-16 10:26 ` Linus Walleij 2013-06-16 10:26 ` Linus Walleij 2013-06-16 10:45 ` Heiko Stübner 2013-06-16 10:45 ` Heiko Stübner 2013-06-16 10:45 ` Heiko Stübner 2013-06-16 12:26 ` Linus Walleij 2013-06-16 12:26 ` Linus Walleij 2013-06-16 12:26 ` Linus Walleij 2013-06-14 15:42 ` [PATCH 2/5] pinctrl: clarify some dt pinconfig options Heiko Stübner 2013-06-14 15:42 ` Heiko Stübner 2013-06-14 15:42 ` Heiko Stübner 2013-06-16 10:28 ` Linus Walleij 2013-06-16 10:28 ` Linus Walleij 2013-06-16 10:28 ` Linus Walleij 2013-06-19 22:10 ` Stephen Warren 2013-06-19 22:10 ` Stephen Warren 2013-06-19 22:10 ` Stephen Warren 2013-06-24 9:51 ` Linus Walleij [this message] 2013-06-24 9:51 ` Linus Walleij 2013-06-14 15:43 ` [PATCH 3/5] pinctrl: handle zero found dt pinconfig properties better Heiko Stübner 2013-06-14 15:43 ` Heiko Stübner 2013-06-14 15:43 ` Heiko Stübner 2013-06-16 10:29 ` Linus Walleij 2013-06-16 10:29 ` Linus Walleij 2013-06-16 10:29 ` Linus Walleij 2013-06-14 15:43 ` [PATCH 4/5] pinctrl: dynamically alloc temp array when parsing dt pinconf options Heiko Stübner 2013-06-14 15:43 ` Heiko Stübner 2013-06-14 15:43 ` Heiko Stübner 2013-06-16 10:31 ` Linus Walleij 2013-06-16 10:31 ` Linus Walleij 2013-06-16 10:31 ` Linus Walleij 2013-06-14 15:44 ` [PATCH 5/5] pinctrl: rockchip: correctly handle arguments of " Heiko Stübner 2013-06-14 15:44 ` Heiko Stübner 2013-06-14 15:44 ` Heiko Stübner 2013-06-16 10:35 ` Linus Walleij 2013-06-16 10:35 ` Linus Walleij 2013-06-16 10:35 ` Linus Walleij 2013-06-16 11:02 ` Heiko Stübner 2013-06-16 11:02 ` Heiko Stübner 2013-06-16 11:02 ` Heiko Stübner 2013-06-16 12:35 ` Linus Walleij 2013-06-16 12:35 ` Linus Walleij 2013-06-16 12:35 ` Linus Walleij 2013-06-16 15:41 ` [PATCH v2] " Heiko Stübner 2013-06-16 15:41 ` Heiko Stübner 2013-06-16 15:41 ` Heiko Stübner 2013-06-17 15:48 ` Linus Walleij 2013-06-17 15:48 ` Linus Walleij 2013-06-17 15:48 ` Linus Walleij 2013-06-14 15:53 ` [PATCH 0/5] pinctrl: fix some issues with new pinconfig dt parsing James Hogan 2013-06-14 15:53 ` James Hogan 2013-06-14 15:53 ` James Hogan 2013-06-17 3:03 ` Laurent Pinchart 2013-06-17 3:03 ` Laurent Pinchart
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to='CACRpkdbKOWEjnkzY2zGOqWPQ7okBjhK4=QR0tHhJYQa42nefXQ@mail.gmail.com' \ --to=linus.walleij@linaro.org \ --cc=devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org \ --cc=grant.likely@linaro.org \ --cc=heiko@sntech.de \ --cc=james.hogan@imgtec.com \ --cc=laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=rob.herring@calxeda.com \ --cc=swarren@wwwdotorg.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.