This series updates the core device drivers to use mux framework
for OMAP4 SDP and PANDA board. It's generated against the
linux-omap master branch. It has a dependency on the Benoit's
omap4 mux data series.
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-omap/msg38995.html
sricharan (5):
OMAP4: hsmmc: Initialise the mmc mux pins
OMAP4: usb-musb: Initialise the usb mux pins.
OMAP4: mcbsp: Initialise the mcbsp mux pins
OMAP4: board-4430sdp: Initialise the mcspi mux pins
OMAP4: serial: Initialise the uart mux pins
arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-4430sdp.c | 20 ++++++++
arch/arm/mach-omap2/devices.c | 83 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
arch/arm/mach-omap2/mcbsp.c | 33 +++++++++++++-
arch/arm/mach-omap2/serial.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++
arch/arm/mach-omap2/usb-musb.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++
5 files changed, 214 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
While doing some internal reviews, there were few debates about existing
mux framework usage. I am summarising that discussion here and would
like to hear more on this from the community.
1. PAD configuration for all pins should be done in a central place(board file)
Pros:
a. All pins configured in a central place. Easy to ensure coverage
and maintenance. Single place to look for all mux related settings
b. Drivers, unless they have run time pad configuration requirements
need not worry about muxing.
Cons:
a. Adds a lot of duplicate data in different board files assuming
most of the pins will be connected the same way across different
boards.
2. Do PAD configuration independently for each module
Pros:
a. Avoids repetition of similar data for different boards.
b. Gives a knowledge of how pins are configured for a module
to the respective owners.
c. Pads are not initialised unless they are really needed.
Cons:
a. Can become difficult to maintain if lot of data tend to be
different across boards.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
