lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [May]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] ARM: exynos: Select PINCTRL_EXYNOS for exynos5
Date
Hi Doug, Olof,

On Wednesday 08 of May 2013 12:33:34 Olof Johansson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 11:48 AM, Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
wrote:
> > Olof,
> >
> > On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> wrote:
> >> Seems like this should be selected by the SoC (ARCH_EXYNOS5) instead
> >> of the board. Actually, I'm not sure we need the board Kconfig entry
> >> long-term; all boards will be dt-only.
> >
> > Good point. Hopefully someone at Samsung can work on removing the
> > board itself? If you'd like me to take this on then let me know and I
> > can put it on my list.
>
> Nothing stops you from doing that on your own. I tend to push back
> onto the maintainers to get them engaged in their own housekeeping,
> but anyone is free to :)
>
> > I'm happy to resubmit my patch under ARCH_EXYNOS5. I'll move the
> > exynos4 one at the same time.
>
> Great.
>
> > I'm going to make the assumption that PINCTRL_EXYNOS and
> > PINCTRL_EXYNOS5440 can happily coexist. Certainly I've got both
> > defined in my tree right now and nothing blows up. I haven't tested
> > on 5440 but things ought to be handled by "compatible" checks, right?
>
> Yes, if they can't coexist then that's a bug.
>
> > I'll also assume that eventually someone will move PINCTRL_EXYNOS5440
> > into PINCTRL_EXYNOS. If PINCTRL_EXYNOS5440 won't eventually move
> > under PINCTRL_EXYNOS then it makes less sense to define PINCTRL_EXYNOS
> > for all exynos parts.
>
> Yeah, it should -- this is just in transition since 5440 was first out
> of the gate with pinctrl.

AFAIK, Exynos5440 contains a completely different pin controller block, which
is not compatible with pinctrl-samsung driver, so I don't see any point of
moving it under PINCTRL_EXYNOS, which is currently used for Exynos 4210, 4x12
and 5250, but will be also extended with driver data for S5PV210 as well.

I'd say that CPU_EXYNOS4210, SOC_EXYNOS4212, SOC_EXYNOS4412 and SOC_EXYNOS5250
should select PINCTRL_EXYNOS and SOC_EXYNOS5440 should be left as is,
selecting PINCTRL_EXYNOS5440.

Best regards,
--
Tomasz Figa
Samsung Poland R&D Center
SW Solution Development, Kernel and System Framework



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-05-09 12:21    [W:0.134 / U:0.484 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site