On 06/17/2013 12:02 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Linus Walleij <linus.wall...@linaro.org> [130617 09:11]: >> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Tony Lindgren <t...@atomide.com> wrote: >> >>> First, I think the concept of remuxing (or even checking) _all_ the pins >>> for a consumer device is wrong on most if not all hardware. For past 10 >>> years I have not seen a case where _all_ the pins for a device would need >>> to be remuxed for any reason. >> >> We may be talking past each other here. On the ux500 we use a lot >> of runtime pincontrol, but none of this is *remuxing*. >> >> We are only *reconfiguring*. > > Hmm routing the signal to a different device is certainly > remuxing but yeah configuring pulls etc does not change the > mux. > >> Now I know that Haojian only recently added pin config to the >> pinctrl-single.c driver so maybe you have mostly seen muxing >> in your driver so far, so you view of the world is a bit different. >> >> On the Nomadik pin controller we do mostly hogged muxing >> at boot time, but a lot of runtime reconfiguration. So our >> needs are very different. >> >> Bear in mind that struct pinctl * forks effects in two paths, >> one is muxing the other is config, like pull-ups etc. > > I also thought the plan was to merge pinmux and pinconf and > do things based the named modes?
Yes, pinctrl_select_state() simply applies a certain named state. A named state can include values for both mux settings and pin configuration values. So, everything is unified under this top-level API. There's certainly no need (nor allowance for really) drivers to be touching and pin_config API directly. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
