| Date | Mon, 27 Jan 2014 15:45:32 +0100 | From | Thomas Petazzoni <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 05/11] pinctrl: mvebu: fix misdesigned resource allocation |
| |
Dear Sebastian Hesselbarth,
On Sat, 25 Jan 2014 19:34:10 +0100, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: > Allocating the pinctrl resource in common pinctrl-mvebu was a misdesign, > as it does not allow SoC specific parts to access the allocated resource. > This moves resource allocation from mvebu_pinctrl_probe to SoC specific > _probe functions and passes the base address to common pinctrl driver > instead. > > Signed-off-by: Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com>
I definitely agree with that: I had the same problem several months ago when I started doing the pinctrl driver for Orion5x, which has a non-linear MPP register set.
However, I'd like this to go a little bit further if possible. See below.
> - return mvebu_pinctrl_probe(pdev); > + return mvebu_pinctrl_probe(pdev, base);
I think there is no need to pass "base" to mvebu_pinctrl_probe(). The only reason we have this is because the base gets stored in the mvebu_pinctrl structure so that the mvebu_common_mpp_get() and mvebu_common_mpp_set() functions that are the default behavior for mvebu_pinconf_group_get() and mvebu_pinconf_group_set() work properly.
Shouldn't we turn these functions mvebu_common_mpp_get() and mvebu_common_mpp_set() into helper functions, accessible from the per-SoC pinctrl drivers, so that they can easily implement their ->mpp_get() and ->mpp_set() callbacks?
This way, the "base" thing is completely owned by the per-SoC driver, which would be more logical I believe.
Thanks!
Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com
|