On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 8:54 PM, Tony Lindgren t...@atomide.com wrote:
We should probably pass over
the static board specific mapping as platform_data to the pinmux device
and make it be part of struct pinctrl_dev. Then new driver instances
can have their own pctldev-mapping and we can
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 6:54 PM, Tony Lindgren t...@atomide.com wrote:
Note that with device tree things get simpler for muxing as we can
get rid of the hardcoded grouping of pins in mux drivers. Instead of
hardcoded pingroups, the groups can be created dynamically based on
what the driver DT
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 1:28 AM, Stephen Warren swar...@nvidia.com wrote:
Describing the HW doesn't necessarily
mean that each device needs to describe what pinmux pins it uses; one
could quite easily have the pinmux describe what settings the various
pins should have and which drivers will
Hi,
* Linus Walleij linus.wall...@linaro.org [24 01:29]:
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 6:54 PM, Tony Lindgren t...@atomide.com wrote:
Note that with device tree things get simpler for muxing as we can
get rid of the hardcoded grouping of pins in mux drivers. Instead of
hardcoded pingroups,
On 16:28 Tue 22 Nov , Stephen Warren wrote:
Tony Lindgren wrote at Tuesday, November 22, 2011 10:54 AM:
* Linus Walleij linus.wall...@linaro.org [22 03:30]:
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 12:09 PM, Thomas Abraham
thomas.abra...@linaro.org wrote:
On 17 November 2011 19:27, Linus
Op 22 nov. 2011, om 18:54 heeft Tony Lindgren het volgende geschreven:
* Linus Walleij linus.wall...@linaro.org [22 03:30]:
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 12:09 PM, Thomas Abraham
thomas.abra...@linaro.org wrote:
On 17 November 2011 19:27, Linus Walleij linus.wall...@linaro.org wrote:
Maybe
-...@lists.linaro.org;
linus.wall...@stericsson.com; linux-samsung-soc; devicetree-
disc...@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/3] pinctrl: add a driver for the OMAP pinmux
Op 22 nov. 2011, om 18:54 heeft Tony Lindgren het volgende geschreven:
* Linus Walleij linus.wall...@linaro.org [22 03:30
Hi Linus,
On 17 November 2011 19:27, Linus Walleij linus.wall...@linaro.org wrote:
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 12:26 PM, Thomas Abraham
thomas.abra...@linaro.org wrote:
For now, the Samsung GPIO, Pinconfig and Pinmux information is
represented in device tree as listed below.
Does this mean
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 12:09 PM, Thomas Abraham
thomas.abra...@linaro.org wrote:
On 17 November 2011 19:27, Linus Walleij linus.wall...@linaro.org wrote:
Maybe I'm mistaken about the device tree ambitions, but
I was sort of hoping that it would not contain too much
custom magic numbers that
* Linus Walleij linus.wall...@linaro.org [22 03:30]:
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 12:09 PM, Thomas Abraham
thomas.abra...@linaro.org wrote:
On 17 November 2011 19:27, Linus Walleij linus.wall...@linaro.org wrote:
Maybe I'm mistaken about the device tree ambitions, but
I was sort of hoping
Tony Lindgren wrote at Tuesday, November 22, 2011 10:54 AM:
* Linus Walleij linus.wall...@linaro.org [22 03:30]:
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 12:09 PM, Thomas Abraham
thomas.abra...@linaro.org wrote:
On 17 November 2011 19:27, Linus Walleij linus.wall...@linaro.org wrote:
Maybe I'm
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 5:33 AM, Rajendra Nayak rna...@ti.com wrote:
On Monday 14 November 2011 10:53 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
* Rajendra Nayakrna...@ti.com [14 04:05]:
+static const struct pinctrl_pin_desc omap4_core_pads[] = {
+ PINCTRL_PIN(0, c12),
+ PINCTRL_PIN(1, d12),
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Rajendra Nayak rna...@ti.com wrote:
(...)
+ * The OMAP control module has a device-control sub-module
+ * which handles all pin/padmuxing for OMAP. The sub-module
+ * is further split into a 'core' instance within the CORE
+ * powerdomain and a 'wkup' instance
On Thursday 17 November 2011 01:50 PM, Linus Walleij wrote:
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Rajendra Nayakrna...@ti.com wrote:
(...)
+ * The OMAP control module has a device-control sub-module
+ * which handles all pin/padmuxing for OMAP. The sub-module
+ * is further split into a 'core'
On 17 November 2011 13:38, Linus Walleij linus.wall...@linaro.org wrote:
Linus,
Is there a plan to move even the data that exists in the pinmux
drivers today (including the function/pin-groups definition)
eventually to DT? Or is it just the 'mapping' data to map
devices to functions (that
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 12:26 PM, Thomas Abraham
thomas.abra...@linaro.org wrote:
For now, the Samsung GPIO, Pinconfig and Pinmux information is
represented in device tree as listed below.
Does this mean that the understanding of this format is merged into
the mainline kernel drivers or is it
This adds a driver for the OMAP pinmux portions of the system
control module.
The driver is based on the u300 pinmux driver and only supports
OMAP4 platforms for now. Also has very minimal functions/pin-groups
for OMAP4 defined.
Signed-off-by: Rajendra Nayak rna...@ti.com
---
* Rajendra Nayak rna...@ti.com [14 04:05]:
--- /dev/null
+++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinmux-omap.c
@@ -0,0 +1,735 @@
+
+/* omap4 core pads */
+static const struct pinctrl_pin_desc omap4_core_pads[] = {
+ PINCTRL_PIN(0, c12),
+ PINCTRL_PIN(1, d12),
+ PINCTRL_PIN(2, c13),
...
On Monday 14 November 2011 10:53 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
* Rajendra Nayakrna...@ti.com [14 04:05]:
--- /dev/null
+++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinmux-omap.c
@@ -0,0 +1,735 @@
+
+/* omap4 core pads */
+static const struct pinctrl_pin_desc omap4_core_pads[] = {
+ PINCTRL_PIN(0, c12),
19 matches
Mail list logo
