Hi Mateusz, On 11 January 2016 at 15:01, Mateusz Kulikowski <mateusz.kulikow...@gmail.com> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA256 > > Hi, > > On 11.01.2016 17:58, Simon Glass wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 6 January 2016 at 11:21, Mateusz Kulikowski >> <mateusz.kulikow...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> This commit add support for 96Boards Dragonboard410C. > [...] >>> + usb_hub_reset_n_pm { >>> + gpios = <&pmic_gpios 2 0>; >>> + }; >>> + >>> + usb_sw_sel_pm { >>> + gpios = <&pmic_gpios 3 0>; >>> + }; >>> + >>> + key_vol_down { >>> + gpios = <&pmic_pon 1 0>; >>> + }; >>> + >>> + key_power { >>> + gpios = <&pmic_pon 0 0>; >>> + }; >> >> The above four nodes seems odd in that they don't have compatible >> strings. Is this how Linux does it? Also more normally the node name >> has hyphens rather than underscores. > > In Linux nodes are childs of PMIC gpio periperhal (pmic_gpios in my case): > &pm8916_gpios { > > usb_hub_reset_pm: usb_hub_reset_pm { > pinconf { > pins = "gpio3"; > function = PMIC_GPIO_FUNC_NORMAL; > output-low; > }; > }; > > (https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/apq8016-sbc-pmic-pins.dtsi) > > I decided to move them away from PMIC, as they only use specific gpios. > > To be honest they are just a references so I don't have to hardcode gpio > names/numbers in > board sources. > > Is it ok if I keep it that way? Could you suggest better approach?
We should avoid forking the device tree and making up bindings. Really it looks like qcom,qpnp-pin should be a pinctrl driver. Then pinctrl-0 in your device node will automatically pick up the correct function. Regards, Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot