Hi Linus,

Thanks. I will fold your comments with Stephen's into a V2 and resend it.

Shouldn't this be:

depends on SOC_TYPE_XWAY
depends on PINCTRL_LANTIQ

?

So LANTIQ selects it's pinctrl driver, the the xway SoC
selects its driver and they both are dependent on their
respective system.

The whole select/depends part is broken. I will clean this up properly

quoted

diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-lantiq.h b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-lantiq.h
+#define ARRAY_AND_SIZE(x)      (x), ARRAY_SIZE(x)

I was actually considering to drop this. Having a "," inside a macro is
a bit ugly.
It leads to the calling code invoking the function with N-1 parameters,
although the function takes N parameters. I find this a bit
confusing/inconsistent.

quoted

+/* macros to help us access the registers */
+#define gpio_getbit(m, r, p)   (!!(ltq_r32(m + r) & (1 << p)))
+#define gpio_setbit(m, r, p)   ltq_w32_mask(0, (1 << p), m + r)
+#define gpio_clearbit(m, r, p) ltq_w32_mask((1 << p), 0, m + r)

So what makes this arch so fantastic that it needs its own read/write functions?
(Just curious...)

Nothing. Its a legacy macro from a few years ago when I first added
lantiq support inside openwrt. I personally like the macro. I use it
wherever I access lantiq registers.
When accessing generic memory ranges, as in the nand driver, I use
writeb() and co.

Matter of taste really. I would prefer to keep it this way if there are
no guidelines against it.

quoted

+/* ---------  gpio_chip related code --------- */
+
+int gpio_to_irq(unsigned int gpio)
+{
+       return -EINVAL;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(gpio_to_irq);
+
+int irq_to_gpio(unsigned int gpio)
+{
+       return -EINVAL;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(irq_to_gpio);

Can't you just leave them undefined?

I just checked how ARM does it. They use
   arch/arm/include/asm/gpio.h

Let me talk to Ralf about this and make a MIPS version of said header file.

Thanks,
John