[PATCH 05/11] pinctrl: mvebu: fix misdesigned resource allocation
From: sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com (Sebastian Hesselbarth)
Date: 2014-01-27 18:26:40
Also in:
lkml
On 01/27/14 15:45, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
On Sat, 25 Jan 2014 19:34:10 +0100, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:quoted
Allocating the pinctrl resource in common pinctrl-mvebu was a misdesign, as it does not allow SoC specific parts to access the allocated resource. This moves resource allocation from mvebu_pinctrl_probe to SoC specific _probe functions and passes the base address to common pinctrl driver instead. Signed-off-by: Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com>I definitely agree with that: I had the same problem several months ago when I started doing the pinctrl driver for Orion5x, which has a non-linear MPP register set. However, I'd like this to go a little bit further if possible. See below.
Agreed.
quoted
- return mvebu_pinctrl_probe(pdev); + return mvebu_pinctrl_probe(pdev, base);I think there is no need to pass "base" to mvebu_pinctrl_probe(). The only reason we have this is because the base gets stored in the mvebu_pinctrl structure so that the mvebu_common_mpp_get() and mvebu_common_mpp_set() functions that are the default behavior for mvebu_pinconf_group_get() and mvebu_pinconf_group_set() work properly. Shouldn't we turn these functions mvebu_common_mpp_get() and mvebu_common_mpp_set() into helper functions, accessible from the per-SoC pinctrl drivers, so that they can easily implement their ->mpp_get() and ->mpp_set() callbacks?
Sounds reasonable to do so. I have a look at removing the base address from common.c completely. Sebastian
This way, the "base" thing is completely owned by the per-SoC driver, which would be more logical I believe.