Re: [RFC] pinctrl: sh-pfc: only use dummy states for non-DT platforms

On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 10:00:37PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > CC Shawn, Sascha for imx1 Sorry for the late response. > > On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 9:34 PM, Sergei Shtylyov > wrote: > > On 03/07/2016 11:29 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > > > ---

Re: [RFC] pinctrl: sh-pfc: only use dummy states for non-DT platforms

On 3/15/2016 11:29 AM, Linus Walleij wrote: From: Wolfram Sang If pinctrl_provide_dummies() is used unconditionally, then the dummy state will be used even on DT platforms when the "init" state was intentionally left out. Instead of "default", the dummy

Re: [RFC] pinctrl: sh-pfc: only use dummy states for non-DT platforms

Hi Linus, On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 9:29 AM, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 7:40 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote: > >> From: Wolfram Sang >> >> If pinctrl_provide_dummies() is used unconditionally, then the

Re: [RFC] pinctrl: sh-pfc: only use dummy states for non-DT platforms

On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 7:40 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote: > From: Wolfram Sang > > If pinctrl_provide_dummies() is used unconditionally, then the dummy > state will be used even on DT platforms when the "init" state was > intentionally left out.

Re: [RFC] pinctrl: sh-pfc: only use dummy states for non-DT platforms

>I'd only like that the "Fixes:" and "Cc:" tags were added to it. To make it easier for you, Linus: Fixes: ef0eebc05130 ("drivers/pinctrl: Add the concept of an "init" state") CC: sta...@vger.kernel.org signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: [RFC] pinctrl: sh-pfc: only use dummy states for non-DT platforms

Hi Linus, On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 11:32 AM, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 4:58 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 10:00:37PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > >>> >This approach is better then, won't have to fix

Re: [RFC] pinctrl: sh-pfc: only use dummy states for non-DT platforms

Hello. On 3/9/2016 1:32 PM, Linus Walleij wrote: This approach is better then, won't have to fix again whenever SH gets DT support. Perhaps the of_have_populated_dt() check should be moved inside pinctrl_provide_dummies()? I suggest we pick up this patch now even with stable tag (the

Re: [RFC] pinctrl: sh-pfc: only use dummy states for non-DT platforms

On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 4:58 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote: > On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 10:00:37PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >> >This approach is better then, won't have to fix again whenever SH gets >> > DT >> > support. >> >> Perhaps the of_have_populated_dt() check

Re: [RFC] pinctrl: sh-pfc: only use dummy states for non-DT platforms

On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 5:21 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote: > >> Perhaps the of_have_populated_dt() check should be moved inside >> pinctrl_provide_dummies()? > > Hmm, the kernel-doc for pinctrl_provide_dummies() says "Usually this > function is called by platforms without pinctrl

Re: [RFC] pinctrl: sh-pfc: only use dummy states for non-DT platforms

On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 10:00:37PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > CC Shawn, Sascha for imx1 > > On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 9:34 PM, Sergei Shtylyov > wrote: > > On 03/07/2016 11:29 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > > > --- a/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/core.c >

Re: [RFC] pinctrl: sh-pfc: only use dummy states for non-DT platforms

Hi Sergei, On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 10:19 PM, Sergei Shtylyov wrote: > On 03/08/2016 12:00 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >>> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/core.c >>> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/core.c >>> @@ -545,7 +545,9 @@ static int

Re: [RFC] pinctrl: sh-pfc: only use dummy states for non-DT platforms

> Perhaps the of_have_populated_dt() check should be moved inside > pinctrl_provide_dummies()? Hmm, the kernel-doc for pinctrl_provide_dummies() says "Usually this function is called by platforms without pinctrl driver support...". Is "without pintctrl" == "no DT"? Linus? signature.asc

Re: [RFC] pinctrl: sh-pfc: only use dummy states for non-DT platforms

On 03/08/2016 12:00 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: --- a/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/core.c +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/core.c @@ -545,7 +545,9 @@ static int sh_pfc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) return ret; } - pinctrl_provide_dummies(); + /*

Re: [RFC] pinctrl: sh-pfc: only use dummy states for non-DT platforms

On 03/07/2016 11:29 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: --- a/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/core.c +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/core.c @@ -545,7 +545,9 @@ static int sh_pfc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) return ret; } - pinctrl_provide_dummies(); + /*

Re: [RFC] pinctrl: sh-pfc: only use dummy states for non-DT platforms

On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 9:02 PM, Sergei Shtylyov wrote: >>> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/core.c >>> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/core.c >>> @@ -545,7 +545,9 @@ static int sh_pfc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >>> return ret; >>>

Re: [RFC] pinctrl: sh-pfc: only use dummy states for non-DT platforms

Hello. On 03/07/2016 10:56 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: From: Wolfram Sang If pinctrl_provide_dummies() is used unconditionally, then the dummy state will be used even on DT platforms when the "init" state was intentionally left out. Instead of "default",

Re: [RFC] pinctrl: sh-pfc: only use dummy states for non-DT platforms

Hi Wolfram, On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 7:40 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote: > From: Wolfram Sang > > If pinctrl_provide_dummies() is used unconditionally, then the dummy > state will be used even on DT platforms when the "init" state was > intentionally

[RFC] pinctrl: sh-pfc: only use dummy states for non-DT platforms

From: Wolfram Sang If pinctrl_provide_dummies() is used unconditionally, then the dummy state will be used even on DT platforms when the "init" state was intentionally left out. Instead of "default", the dummy "init" state will then be used during probe. Thus,