On 11/05/17 17:16, Tony Lindgren wrote: >> pinctrl-single doesn't allow to freely set the bits, but requires the >> pins to have similar bit structure (function-mask). In CONTROL_DSIPHY, >> DSI1 and DSI2 have different bit structures. > > OK if the register mixes different types of controllers that > can't be partitioned into separate 8 or 16 bit instances then > you're out of luck with pinctrl-single. If it does not fit, no > point trying to force it, then you need a custom pinctrl driver.
Writing a driver for a single register on a legacy SoC feels like an overkill... But I guess a generic pinctrl driver which allows free writes to registers would do the trick, but, then again, if so far we have a single register in a single SoC that needs this, maybe it's not worth the effort. >> I don't understand why pinctrl-single tries so hard to fit things into >> one mold... > > Basically on many SoCs pinctrl is just the same exact control > register repeated for each pin on the SoC: Right, I was just wondering why it forces one to have a function mask, versus allowing it to be left out and thus making it possible to handle also cases where the pins require different kinds of bit masks. Tomi
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
