From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751992Ab2A0RjN (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Jan 2012 12:39:13 -0500 Received: from hqemgate04.nvidia.com ([216.228.121.35]:2769 "EHLO hqemgate04.nvidia.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751406Ab2A0RjM convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Jan 2012 12:39:12 -0500 X-PGP-Universal: processed; by hqnvupgp08.nvidia.com on Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:38:49 -0800 From: Stephen Warren To: Tony Lindgren , Simon Glass CC: Dong Aisheng-B29396 , "Linus Walleij (linus.walleij@linaro.org)" , "Sascha Hauer (s.hauer@pengutronix.de)" , "rob.herring@calxeda.com" , "kernel@pengutronix.de" , "cjb@laptop.org" , Dong Aisheng , "Shawn Guo (shawn.guo@linaro.org)" , Thomas Abraham , "Grant Likely (grant.likely@secretlab.ca)" , "devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:38:47 -0800 Subject: RE: Pinmux bindings proposal V2 Thread-Topic: Pinmux bindings proposal V2 Thread-Index: AczcmluDG1Pve/zoRAabNjsUBaUoRQAf9XAw Message-ID: <74CDBE0F657A3D45AFBB94109FB122FF178E123E59@HQMAIL01.nvidia.com> References: <74CDBE0F657A3D45AFBB94109FB122FF1780DAB4CE@HQMAIL01.nvidia.com> <20120127022111.GK29812@atomide.com> In-Reply-To: <20120127022111.GK29812@atomide.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Tony Lindgren wrote at Thursday, January 26, 2012 7:21 PM: > * Simon Glass [120126 09:11]: > > > > On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 2:22 PM, Stephen Warren wrote: > > > > 1. It doesn't seem to make full use of the device tree format. For example, > > > > > > > > would be better as something like > > > > drive-strength = <5>; > > > > if we could arrange it. It also reduces the need for these > > TEGRA_PMX_CONF_DRIVE_STRENGTH defines. > > I agree. This is something that most pinmux/pinconf drivers need to > implement, so it's best done in a generic way. Yet: * Some controllers don't have a "drive strength" property * Others have a single "drive strength" property * Others configure drive strength separately for driving a signal high or low. Hence, representing this in a generic fashion doesn't seem possible to me, except through (key, value) pairs where the individual drivers or bindings define what the keys are. -- nvpublic