lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Jan]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Pinmux bindings proposal V2
Hi Tony,

On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 01:00:52PM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
...
> So to summarize: I suggest we'll just stick to basics to get the system
> booting and devices working using device tree. In most cases the device
> drivers should be able to configure the suspend and off states in a generic
> way using pinctrl API. Everything else, like debugging, we can probably
> do with userspace tools.
>
> This would mean just using a minimal subset of your binding, probably
> very close to what you originally suggested.
>
IMHO, as a generic device tree binding, it should be able to cope with
different use cases. It's really free for you to use the minimal
subset of the binding as your need, but we should not make the binding
design just be that minimal subset to force that everyone else can
only use the minimal subset.

--
Regards,
Shawn


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-01-26 10:27    [W:0.245 / U:0.348 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site