Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 13 Feb 2023 10:03:49 +0100 | From | Neil Armstrong <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 5/8] arm64: dts: amlogic: meson-g12b-odroid-go-ultra: rename keypad-gpio pinctrl node |
| |
On 11/02/2023 21:04, Martin Blumenstingl wrote: > On Tue, Feb 7, 2023 at 4:08 PM Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org> wrote: >> >> Fixes the following bindings check error: >> pinctrl@40: keypad-gpio: {...} is not of type 'array' >> >> Signed-off-by: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org> > Reviewed-by: Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> > > [...] >> &periphs_pinctrl { >> - keypad_gpio_pins: keypad-gpio { >> + keypad_gpio_pins: keypad-gpio-state { >> mux { >> groups = "GPIOX_0", "GPIOX_1", "GPIOX_2", "GPIOX_3", >> "GPIOX_4", "GPIOX_5", "GPIOX_6", "GPIOX_7", > I'm wondering whether we make the keys work without having to specify > a pinmux configuration for them separately. > Our pinctrl driver already sets: > pc->chip.set_config = gpiochip_generic_config; > So you should be able to use the GPIO_PULL_UP flag for these GPIOs in > device-tree instead of specifying bias-pull-up here, for example: > gpios = <&gpio GPIOX_0 (GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW | GPIO_PULL_UP)>; > > output-disable is managed by the direction of the GPIO anyways. > pinmux_ops.gpio_request_enable is also implemented by our pinctrl driver. > > This is not urgent - I am just curious as always :-)
I didn't know we supported this, this is only a bindings check fix, but yeah at some point this should be moved to (GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW | GPIO_PULL_UP).
Neil
> > > Best regards, > Martin
| |