From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36EC3C43331 for ; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 16:39:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E838321556 for ; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 16:39:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="EUuRl5Gz"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=st.com header.i=@st.com header.b="BLUTq+CN" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org E838321556 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=st.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From: References:To:Subject:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=d3AXnp5MqZAPVrJh/OsIcWWOknABx007b4vWnnK0b1M=; b=EUuRl5GzLDYPfBV6XX+rNlR8p 6+eo3wOR/EJ8WNEWBgEUMBZnFSXdnEXXDBJxM996pcCI5acCGjZZtJmtgyDHGS7MkUA1EueChq8O2 0rNOpCZVgthllh/iV9A6cXpQ6h06TcDbd3qK+RaMXtIHrLUtWVaWnHHPkjaUDX/dT/0OgRsJ3bTm+ Qec8HYDlHPw7VnmlDlyHrYzFlrWfhCFSaWqnOBlzw/G7EIhq4KVXp01SEwO1/rgYnwhwY4X88rJuP JxRX3FLSuiaqqch/7VtzwAddIY/ZDOcK9RkbFnYpuEhoPi4LcJJlj7YD/+JN3ZxQde+bgCkxYFMqa HXHaKwNkw==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jJJvd-0003eX-Mf; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 16:39:53 +0000 Received: from mx07-00178001.pphosted.com ([62.209.51.94]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jJJvZ-0003de-6B for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 16:39:51 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (m0046037.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx07-00178001.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 02VGRlJS015329; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 18:39:44 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=st.com; h=subject : to : cc : references : from : message-id : date : mime-version : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=STMicroelectronics; bh=sT2vh+CbNLLwsyoUu1PxJ6qH6vi8z4QoKbbZsolQmk8=; b=BLUTq+CN428fn52XotvWhK4/i0mk316vQOcVChaqSre8T0r0/BouN0R/vVlttvjJ3+Mz 7atRMqHZlJWtAoS4PFRQozGP9GRqkhZjZjHSkUSLvNWcDM0q3b767fDdlPtCP+/pDmku g0dHiWXwqG33deUQBBy/ClAD/0Zsg9KhpDsLdn93nTuo/ldv+c7bmMaMu3nyS8/FwD5o AKdYqHbmize4Jl9fLYzxQP+QpEa9iFgEbweLkym9eZ8GZQHU35IywcqrLKTfqissXMOY ZGq8iF1w+nthKlI1b+XBNoD/0ELHI+VhVEgJsSgCZSE83dej6jUaRloxuL3e96mxxRy1 rA== Received: from beta.dmz-eu.st.com (beta.dmz-eu.st.com [164.129.1.35]) by mx07-00178001.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 301w8105f1-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 31 Mar 2020 18:39:44 +0200 Received: from euls16034.sgp.st.com (euls16034.sgp.st.com [10.75.44.20]) by beta.dmz-eu.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id 3C95510002A; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 18:39:39 +0200 (CEST) Received: from Webmail-eu.st.com (sfhdag3node2.st.com [10.75.127.8]) by euls16034.sgp.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id 230E12BF9DD; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 18:39:39 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lmecxl0912.tpe.st.com (10.75.127.48) by SFHDAG3NODE2.st.com (10.75.127.8) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1347.2; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 18:39:34 +0200 Subject: Re: [Linux-stm32] [PATCH 07/22] ARM: dts: stm32: Add alternate pinmux for SDMMC2 pins 4-7 To: Marek Vasut , Ahmad Fatoum , Patrice CHOTARD , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" References: <20200328171144.51888-1-marex@denx.de> <20200328171144.51888-8-marex@denx.de> <0fb89d25-feb0-2eb0-9e83-d7f8c76f8b9e@st.com> <82dcf412-119b-0de2-0c50-f6877a82a812@pengutronix.de> <310aa3a3-09ce-42ef-d1ea-b653163d1d72@pengutronix.de> <97d13a84-8220-aa7f-3ee6-df474cca3882@denx.de> <43e88a1b-f3e4-df1d-38a6-0bb281a2f786@st.com> <871a5cc2-615d-b9e5-0eed-9a5a38be4f6c@denx.de> From: Alexandre Torgue Message-ID: <69bce6d4-129e-b9ea-8fa6-f33d9047e3c3@st.com> Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 18:39:27 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.4.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <871a5cc2-615d-b9e5-0eed-9a5a38be4f6c@denx.de> Content-Language: en-US X-Originating-IP: [10.75.127.48] X-ClientProxiedBy: SFHDAG4NODE3.st.com (10.75.127.12) To SFHDAG3NODE2.st.com (10.75.127.8) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.676 definitions=2020-03-31_05:2020-03-31, 2020-03-31 signatures=0 X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20200331_093949_585954_A69E2176 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 18.42 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Patrick DELAUNAY , Maxime Coquelin , "linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On 3/31/20 3:38 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: > On 3/31/20 10:58 AM, Alexandre Torgue wrote: >> >> >> On 3/30/20 1:45 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: >>> On 3/30/20 1:37 PM, Ahmad Fatoum wrote: >>>> Hi Marek, >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>>> On 3/30/20 1:22 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: >>>>> On 3/30/20 1:17 PM, Ahmad Fatoum wrote: >>>>>> Hello Patrice, >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>>> On 3/30/20 1:11 PM, Patrice CHOTARD wrote: >>>>>>> For your information, another submitted patch uses the same >>>>>>> pinctrl sdmmc2_d47_pins_b node with different muxing (SDMMC2_D5) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> see https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1216452/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I haven't checked other muxing if there are other conflict. >>>>>> >>>>>> (author of linked patch here) >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't like the central stm32mp15-pinctrl.dtsi. I'd have preferred >>>>>> if each >>>>>> file defined the pinctrl groups it is using. >>>>> >>>>> I'm not a big fan of that either, because this is gonna be a >>>>> combinatorial explosion of various pinmux options. But if you have each >>>>> board define it's pinmux, it's also gonna become a massive amount of >>>>> duplication (like iMX). So I cannot tell which one is better ... >>>> >>>> Mhm. A middle ground could be keeping stm32mp15-pinctrl, but only for >>>> the >>>> official ST eval kits as HW designers are expected to copy off those >>>> and have >>>> board specifics in the board/SoM device tree? >>> >>> Then you should call it stm32mp1-something-st-eval-pinmux.dtsi , >>> otherwise it's gonna be confusing. >>> >>>> If it has to be either one or the other, I prefer duplication in the >>>> device >>>> tree. When the HW misses pull ups or needs to adjust slew rates, you >>>> probably >>>> don't want a new, slightly different, pinctrl group in the >>>> stm32mp15-pinctrl.dtsi >>>> for each variant. >>> >>> That's a valid point, but then you can override those in the boards' >>> pinmux node for a specific pinmux entry too. >>> >>>> So you are left with doctoring around with overrides and >>>> /delete-property/, >>>> while just duplicating the node with the correct properties would've >>>> been >>>> better for readability IMO. >>> >>> That is true, but how many of such cases do we have so far ? Maybe it's >>> better to cross that bridge when (if) we come to it. >>> >> >> I agree, and I prefer to keep pins groups definition in >> stm32mp15-pinctrl.dtsi file. IMO, it is easier for users to find them in >> only one file. Actually, I already had this discussions with some guys >> "where pins groups have to be defined ?". For me (and maybe only for >> me), muxing is SOC dependent, I mean SoC provides a bunch a possible >> pinmux for each IPs. If we got enough memory spaces (and time to waste >> also) we could define all possible pinmux (AFx....) for each devices and >> let board users chose the good one (using stm32mp15-pictrl.dtsi as a >> database). In board file, you select one possible pin configuration >> (provided by the SoC) for your device according to your schematic. >> However you could append pin groups in board file to update bias, >> slewrate ... >> If your concern it to embed a bunch of not used pin configuration for a >> board, we could use /omit-if-no-ref/ tag on pin groups. > > Can we instead define pinmux the way e.g. iMX6 does , as separate pins , > instead of pinmux groups ? > Sorry but what would the advantage to do so ? _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel