On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 08:52:40PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
quoted
quoted
quoted
&usdhc1 {
pinctrl-names = "default";
pinctrl-0 = <&pinctrl_usdhc1_1 &pinctrl_usdhc1_1_dat3cd>;
...
status = "okay";
};
Are you sure that this will always be the case? This would assume that
the pinctrl entries are always processed sequentially.
That will always be the case per my understanding. Otherwise, I would
be so surprised. Are you seeing any case that the entries are not
processed sequentially?
Given the way the Linux code currently works, I think that will
currently happen in practice. However, there's nothing in the pinctrl DT
binding documentation that guarantees (or even mentions) such semantics.
Ah, that's Russell's point, I guess. I think it makes perfect sense to
make this clear in the binding doc, as this "overwrite mechanism" can be
very helpful. I will send a patch for it.
Shawn