On Sunday, August 10, 2014 6:15 PM, Andreas Farber wrote:

Am 05.08.2014 13:16, schrieb Jingoo Han:

quoted

On Saturday, August 02, 2014 5:57 AM, Tomasz Figa wrote:

quoted

On 01.08.2014 22:54, Andreas Färber wrote:

quoted

Am 01.08.2014 22:33, schrieb Doug Anderson:

quoted

On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 9:54 PM, Andreas Färber [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Spring uses a different GPIO, so this is not a generic SoC piece.

Suggested-by: Tomasz Figa <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Andreas Färber <afaerber@suse.de>
---
 v5: New (Tomasz Figa)
 Frees dp_hpd for Spring.

 arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-pinctrl.dtsi | 7 -------
 arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-smdk5250.dts | 9 +++++++++
 arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts     | 7 +++++++
 3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-pinctrl.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-

pinctrl.dtsi

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

index 886cfca044ac..ed0e5230514b 100644

--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-pinctrl.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-pinctrl.dtsi

@@ -581,13 +581,6 @@
                        samsung,pin-pud = <0>;
                        samsung,pin-drv = <0>;
                };
-
-               dp_hpd: dp_hpd {
-                       samsung,pins = "gpx0-7";
-                       samsung,pin-function = <3>;
-                       samsung,pin-pud = <0>;
-                       samsung,pin-drv = <0>;
-               };
        };

        pinctrl@13400000 {

diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-smdk5250.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-

smdk5250.dts

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

index aaa055ac0fe3..5d30fe1dcda4 100644

--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-smdk5250.dts
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-smdk5250.dts

@@ -414,3 +414,12 @@
                };
        };
 };
+
+&pinctrl_0 {
+       dp_hpd: dp_hpd {
+               samsung,pins = "gpx0-7";
+               samsung,pin-function = <3>;
+               samsung,pin-pud = <0>;
+               samsung,pin-drv = <0>;
+       };
+};

diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts
index c4b0c73c736d..a9a2f2743794 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts

@@ -547,6 +547,13 @@
 };

 &pinctrl_0 {
+       dp_hpd: dp_hpd {
+               samsung,pins = "gpx0-7";
+               samsung,pin-function = <3>;
+               samsung,pin-pud = <0>;
+               samsung,pin-drv = <0>;
+       };
+

NAK.  dp_hpd is a generic SoC piece.  Pin function 0 and 1 are GPIOs.
Pin function 3 is special function.  This pin _is_ the hot plug detect
pin for display port.  When it's set as special function 3 it goes
straight into the hot plug logic of the display port controller.

Spring may have had its reasons to detect hot plug events on a GPIO
instead of using this pin, but that doesn't make this pin any less the
"hot plug pin".

Please advise how to handle it then: Should there be two different
pinctrl entries (if so, how should it be named?),

IMHO this is the right way. Just name the GPIO variant dp_hpd_gpio.

Hi Andreas Färber,

I agree with Tomasz Figa and Doug Anderson.
Please refer to the following.

1. case: Standard HPD pin is used. (smdk5420)
arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420-pinctrl.dts
	pinctrl@13400000 {
		dp_hpd: dp_hpd {
			samsung,pins = "gpx0-7";
			samsung,pin-function = <3>;
			samsung,pin-pud = <0>;
			samsung,pin-drv = <0>;
		};
arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420-smdk5420.dts
	dp-controller@145B0000 {
		pinctrl-names = "default";
		pinctrl-0 = <&dp_hpd>;
		...

2. case: non-standard HPD pin such as GPIO is used. (peach pit)
arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420-peach-pit.dts
	pinctrl@13400000 {
		dp_hpd_gpio: dp_hpd_gpio {
			samsung,pins = "gpx2-6";
			samsung,pin-function = <0>;
			samsung,pin-pud = <3>;
			samsung,pin-drv = <0>;
		};
	dp-controller@145B0000 {
		pinctrl-names = "default";
		pinctrl-0 = <&dp_hpd_gpio>;
		...
		samsung,hpd-gpio = <&gpx2 6 0>;

So, you need to follow the second case.
"dp_hpd_gpio" can be used for Spring board.

I believe I already did so in v6 [0]? Please take a look there and let
me know if you still need anything changed. The label name seems
identical, whereas for the node name I adopted the dashes convention.

OK, I checked v6 patches.
I have no objection. It looks good.
Thank you.

Best regards,
Jingoo Han

Thanks,
Andreas

[0] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/4664691/

--
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer; HRB 16746 AG Nürnberg
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html