lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Feb]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [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

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-03-27 00:19    [W:0.073 / U:0.676 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site