Hi Jacopo, On Tuesday, January 10, 2017, Jacopo Mondi wrote: > So, I guess what direction to take depends on whether or not we're going > to see more hardware with a per-pin configuration that would benefit from > this new rz-pfc driver (it seems so) and if this justify splitting sh-pfc > in two, a group-based one for R-Car devices (and all devices there > already) and a new pin-based one.
Well, since I'm the one with the "renesas.com" email address, I'll try to see if I can figure out if the R-Car PFC can be changed to something else for R-Car Gen4. Same goes for RZ/G. Sometimes the chip designers just keep doing the same thing over and over again because they don't get any feedback from the SW guys. > Or maybe we can tie pin-based configuration in sh-pfc and it's me not > seeing how to do that. At some point....we do need to leave the "sh-" name behind as I don't really see much of a future for SH4 devices. Using something like pinctrl-renesas is probably a better name. Although, anyone who's watched the semiconductor business over the years knows that names never stay the same. (sigh) Chris
