From: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> Cc: Haojian Zhuang <haojian.zhuang@gmail.com>, "devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org" <devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org>, Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com>, Linux-OMAP <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>, "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, Roger Quadros <rogerq@ti.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] pinctrl: single: Prepare for supporting SoC specific features Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 01:57:34 -0700 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20130729085731.GW7656@atomide.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CACRpkdapXZO003xhRCVg5sfQCfJUPMzunui5u6npmht-2hP7Tg@mail.gmail.com> * Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> [130722 14:22]: > On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 5:27 PM, Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> wrote: > > > Subject: [PATCH] pinctrl: single: Prepare for supporting SoC specific features > > > > Let's replace is_pinconf with flags and add struct pcs_soc so we > > can support also other features like pin wake-up events. Let's > > export the probe so the SoC specific modules can pass their > > SoC specific data to pinctrl-single if needed. > > I don't quite understand this motivation. Can this be more verbose and > include a bit about the mechanics? > > - Why is this necessary? For example, pinctrl-single already supports > generic pinconf, and we can surely add a PIN_CONFIG_WAKEUP > to include/linux/pinctrl/pinconf-generic.h. OK I'll take a look. I like the irqchip idea, let's see what all is missing after that. > - Also: how does this cooperate with irq_set_wake()? If a pin is > set to GPIO it is often backed by a GPIO driver (which is calling > pinctrl_request_gpio() etc), maybe we should just add a > pinctrl_set_wake() then that the irqchip portions of the GPIO drivers > can call down to so the pinctrl driver sets this bit if need be? Yes currently we're missing the mapping between GPIO registers and pinctrl registers. But your idea of using irqchip + pinctrl_set_wake() might sort that issue. Regards, Tony
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: tony@atomide.com (Tony Lindgren) To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: [PATCH 1/4] pinctrl: single: Prepare for supporting SoC specific features Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 01:57:34 -0700 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20130729085731.GW7656@atomide.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CACRpkdapXZO003xhRCVg5sfQCfJUPMzunui5u6npmht-2hP7Tg@mail.gmail.com> * Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> [130722 14:22]: > On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 5:27 PM, Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> wrote: > > > Subject: [PATCH] pinctrl: single: Prepare for supporting SoC specific features > > > > Let's replace is_pinconf with flags and add struct pcs_soc so we > > can support also other features like pin wake-up events. Let's > > export the probe so the SoC specific modules can pass their > > SoC specific data to pinctrl-single if needed. > > I don't quite understand this motivation. Can this be more verbose and > include a bit about the mechanics? > > - Why is this necessary? For example, pinctrl-single already supports > generic pinconf, and we can surely add a PIN_CONFIG_WAKEUP > to include/linux/pinctrl/pinconf-generic.h. OK I'll take a look. I like the irqchip idea, let's see what all is missing after that. > - Also: how does this cooperate with irq_set_wake()? If a pin is > set to GPIO it is often backed by a GPIO driver (which is calling > pinctrl_request_gpio() etc), maybe we should just add a > pinctrl_set_wake() then that the irqchip portions of the GPIO drivers > can call down to so the pinctrl driver sets this bit if need be? Yes currently we're missing the mapping between GPIO registers and pinctrl registers. But your idea of using irqchip + pinctrl_set_wake() might sort that issue. Regards, Tony
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-07-29 8:57 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 64+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2013-06-07 20:50 [PATCH 0/4] pinctrl single support for SoC specific features Tony Lindgren 2013-06-07 20:50 ` Tony Lindgren 2013-06-07 20:50 ` [PATCH 1/4] pinctrl: single: Prepare for supporting " Tony Lindgren 2013-06-07 20:50 ` Tony Lindgren 2013-06-08 9:37 ` Haojian Zhuang 2013-06-08 9:37 ` Haojian Zhuang 2013-06-08 15:27 ` Tony Lindgren 2013-06-08 15:27 ` Tony Lindgren 2013-06-09 5:21 ` Haojian Zhuang 2013-06-09 5:21 ` Haojian Zhuang 2013-07-22 21:15 ` Linus Walleij 2013-07-22 21:15 ` Linus Walleij 2013-07-29 8:57 ` Tony Lindgren [this message] 2013-07-29 8:57 ` Tony Lindgren 2013-06-07 20:50 ` [PATCH 2/4] pinctrl: single: Add hardware specific hooks for IRQ and GPIO wake-up events Tony Lindgren 2013-06-07 20:50 ` Tony Lindgren 2013-06-09 4:46 ` Haojian Zhuang 2013-06-09 4:46 ` Haojian Zhuang 2013-06-10 15:36 ` Tony Lindgren 2013-06-10 15:36 ` Tony Lindgren 2013-07-22 21:44 ` Linus Walleij 2013-07-22 21:44 ` Linus Walleij 2013-07-29 8:50 ` Tony Lindgren 2013-07-29 8:50 ` Tony Lindgren 2013-06-07 20:50 ` [PATCH 3/4] pinctrl: single: omap: Add SoC specific module for " Tony Lindgren 2013-06-07 20:50 ` Tony Lindgren 2013-06-08 15:29 ` Tony Lindgren 2013-06-08 15:29 ` Tony Lindgren 2013-06-09 5:28 ` Haojian Zhuang 2013-06-09 5:28 ` Haojian Zhuang 2013-06-10 10:03 ` Quadros, Roger 2013-06-10 10:03 ` Quadros, Roger 2013-06-10 15:21 ` Tony Lindgren 2013-06-10 15:21 ` Tony Lindgren 2013-06-11 12:51 ` Roger Quadros 2013-06-11 12:51 ` Roger Quadros 2013-06-12 13:33 ` Tony Lindgren 2013-06-12 13:33 ` Tony Lindgren 2013-07-22 22:03 ` Linus Walleij 2013-07-22 22:03 ` Linus Walleij 2013-07-22 22:06 ` Linus Walleij 2013-07-22 22:06 ` Linus Walleij 2013-06-07 20:50 ` [PATCH 4/4] ARM: OMAP: Move DT wake-up event handling over to use pinctrl-single-omap Tony Lindgren 2013-06-07 20:50 ` Tony Lindgren 2013-06-07 20:52 ` Tony Lindgren 2013-06-07 20:52 ` Tony Lindgren 2013-06-10 15:36 ` Tony Lindgren 2013-06-10 15:36 ` Tony Lindgren 2013-06-10 12:31 ` Quadros, Roger 2013-06-10 12:31 ` Quadros, Roger 2013-06-10 14:25 ` Tony Lindgren 2013-06-10 14:25 ` Tony Lindgren 2013-06-11 9:08 ` Roger Quadros 2013-06-11 9:08 ` Roger Quadros 2013-07-10 12:10 ` [PATCH 0/4] pinctrl single support for SoC specific features Roger Quadros 2013-07-10 12:10 ` Roger Quadros 2013-07-10 12:24 ` Tony Lindgren 2013-07-10 12:24 ` Tony Lindgren 2013-07-10 13:14 ` Roger Quadros 2013-07-10 13:14 ` Roger Quadros 2013-07-22 20:54 ` Linus Walleij 2013-07-22 20:54 ` Linus Walleij 2013-07-29 8:59 ` Tony Lindgren 2013-07-29 8:59 ` Tony Lindgren
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=20130729085731.GW7656@atomide.com \ --to=tony@atomide.com \ --cc=devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org \ --cc=haojian.zhuang@gmail.com \ --cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=peter.ujfalusi@ti.com \ --cc=rogerq@ti.com \ /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.