Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 13 Aug 2018 13:41:52 -0600 | From | Lina Iyer <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH RESEND RFC 2/4] drivers: pinctrl: qcom: add wakeup gpio map for sdm845 |
| |
On Wed, Aug 01 2018 at 14:04 -0600, Lina Iyer wrote: >On Wed, Aug 01 2018 at 02:42 -0600, Marc Zyngier wrote: >>On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 03:00:19 +0100, >>Lina Iyer <ilina@codeaurora.org> wrote: >>> >>>Add GPIO to PDC pin map for the SDM845 SoC. >>> >>>Signed-off-by: Lina Iyer <ilina@codeaurora.org> >>>--- >>> drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-sdm845.c | 76 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> 1 file changed, 76 insertions(+) >>> >>>diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-sdm845.c b/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-sdm845.c >>>index 2ab7a8885757..e93660922dc2 100644 >>>--- a/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-sdm845.c >>>+++ b/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-sdm845.c >>>@@ -1277,6 +1277,80 @@ static const struct msm_pingroup sdm845_groups[] = { >>> UFS_RESET(ufs_reset, 0x99f000), >>> }; >>> >>>+static struct msm_pinctrl_pdc_map sdm845_wakeup_gpios[] = { >> >>[huge array] >> >>>+}; >> >>Why isn't that array part of the DT? I'd expect other SoCs to >>eventually use a similar mechanism, no? >> >I agree and it should be. > >One place I am thinking is to add it to the DT definition of PDC >controller as a data argument - > > tlmm: pinctrl@000000{ > [...] > interrupts-extended = <&pdc 30 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH 1>, > <&pdc 31 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH 3>, > <&pdc 32 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH 5>, > ^ > |--- Provide the GPIO > for the PDC pin here. > }; > > pdc: interrupt-controller@b220000 { > compatible = "qcom,sdm845-pdc"; > reg = <0xb220000 0x30000>; > qcom,pdc-ranges = <0 512 94>, <94 641 15>, <115 662 7>; > #interrupt-cells = <3>; <-------- Increase this from 2 ? > interrupt-parent = <&intc>; > interrupt-controller; > }; > >Would that be acceptable? > Any ideas on how to do this better? >Thanks, >Lina
|  |