On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 11:21:30AM -0800, Stephen Warren wrote:

Shawn Guo wrote at Tuesday, January 17, 2012 1:24 AM:

...

quoted

Considering the different pinctrl configurations for the same client
device usually share the same pinmux and only pinconf varies.  It may
worth introducing another level phandle reference.  Something like
the following:

I don't think there's a need for another level of indirection. The 1:n
model I was talking about already handles this, I believe. See below.

Yes, agreed.

...

quoted

This will be pretty useful for imx6 usdhc case, which will have 3
pinctrl configuration for each usdhc device (imx6 has 4 usdhc devices),
pinctrl-50mhz, pinctrl-100mhz and pinctrl-200mhz.  All these 3 states
have the exactly same pinmux settings, and only varies on pinconf.

Yes, I definitely agree there's a need for this.

As an aside, I wonder if the following would be any better:

It does look better to me.

Regards,
Shawn

sdhci@c8000200 {
    ...
    pinctrl = <&pinmux_sdhci> <&pinconf_sdhci_active>
              <&pinmux_sdhci> <&pinconf_sdhci_suspend>;
    /* Number of entries in pinctrl for each in pinctrl-names */
    pinctrl-entries = <2 2>;
    pinctrl-names = "active", "suspend";
};

That seems more complex though.