On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 10:48 PM, Stephen Warren <swar...@wwwdotorg.org> wrote: > On 08/22/2013 01:07 AM, Sonic Zhang wrote: >> >> There are 6 to 9 GPIO HW blocks in one Blackfin SoC. Function >> pinmux_enable_setting() in current pinctrl framework assumes the >> function mux setting of one peripheral pin group is configured in one >> pinctrl device. But, the function mux setting of one blackfin >> peripheral may be done among different GPIO HW blocks. So, I have to >> separate the pinctrl driver from the GPIO block driver add the ranges >> of all GPIO blocks into one pinctrl device for Blackfin. > > I don't think you need separate device; the pin control mapping table > entries for a particular state simply needs to include entries for > multiple pin controllers.
So splitting each block into a separate pin control device is definately one way to skin the cat. The ux500 would then have 9 pin controller instances (after a big fat refactoring, but whatever) instead of 9 GPIO instances and one pinctrl instance referencing them. Also this solves the problem of registering GPIO ranges from the wrong end of the pin controller. Hm, I should try this and see where it goes... What do you think about this Sonic? Yours, Linus Walleij -- 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/
