On Wed, 19 Sep 2018 at 23:22, Florian Fainelli [off-list ref] wrote:

On 09/19/2018 02:02 PM, Rafa? Mi?ecki wrote:

quoted

From: Rafa? Mi?ecki <rafal@milecki.pl>

Northstar has mux controller just like Northstar Plus and Northstar2.
It's a bit different though (different registers & pins) so it requires
its own binding.

It's needed to allow other block bindings specify required mux setup.

Signed-off-by: Rafa? Mi?ecki <rafal@milecki.pl>
---
 .../devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/brcm,ns-pinmux.txt | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/brcm,ns-pinmux.txt

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/brcm,ns-pinmux.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/brcm,ns-pinmux.txt
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..0e913721ae9e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/brcm,ns-pinmux.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+Broadcom Northstar pins mux controller
+
+Some of Northstar SoCs's pins can be used for various purposes thanks to the mux
+controller. This binding allows describing mux controller and listing available
+functions. They can be referenced later by other bindings to let system
+configure controller correctly.
+
+Required properties:
+- compatible: brcm,ns-pinmux
+- reg: iomem address range of CRU (Central Resource Unit) pin registers
+- reg-names: "cru_pins_control" - the only needed & supported reg right now

Technically the register range that you cover is named CRU_GPIO_CONTROLx
with x being in [0-8].

Thanks! Do you think
reg-names: "cru_gpio_controls"
will be fine? Or should I keep it singular like:
reg-names: "cru_gpio_control"
?

-- 
Rafa?