Re: [PATCH 05/11] drivers: pinctrl: add driver for Allwinner A64 SoC

On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 6:00 PM, Maxime Ripard
[off-list ref] wrote:

Hi Andre,

On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 10:49:16PM +0000, André Przywara wrote:

quoted

On 01/02/16 18:27, Karsten Merker wrote:

Hi Karsten,

thank you very much for your feedback!

quoted

On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 05:39:24PM +0000, Andre Przywara wrote:

quoted

Based on the Allwinner A64 user manual and on the previous sunxi
pinctrl drivers this introduces the pin multiplex assignments for
the ARMv8 Allwinner A64 SoC.
Port A is apparently used for the fixed function DRAM controller, so
the ports start at B here (the manual mentions "n from 1 to 7", so
not starting at 0).

Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <redacted>
---
 .../bindings/pinctrl/allwinner,sunxi-pinctrl.txt   |   1 +
 arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms                       |   1 +
 drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/Kconfig                      |   4 +
 drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/Makefile                     |   1 +
 drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-a64.c                | 606 +++++++++++++++++++++
 5 files changed, 613 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-a64.c

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/allwinner,sunxi-pinctrl.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/allwinner,sunxi-pinctrl.txt
index 9213b27..9050002 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/allwinner,sunxi-pinctrl.txt
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/allwinner,sunxi-pinctrl.txt

@@ -21,6 +21,7 @@ Required properties:
   "allwinner,sun9i-a80-r-pinctrl"
   "allwinner,sun8i-a83t-pinctrl"
   "allwinner,sun8i-h3-pinctrl"
+  "allwinner,a64-pinctrl"

Hello,

on all other Allwinner SoCs we use the SoC family as part of the
compatible, as well as in the names of the Kconfig options. To
keep things consistent, I would like to propose doing the same on
Arm64, i.e. using allwinner,sun50i-a64-pinctrl instead of
allwinner,a64-pinctrl.

Yes, I have been told this already. However I don't like this idea so
much, for the following reasons:
a) It is mostly redundant. The actual SoC (marketing) name is unique,
there is no sun6i-a20 or sun7i-a23.

At the same time, the family name is mostly valid too.

We do share some DTSI across some SoCs already by their family name
(sun5i.dtsi for the A10s/A13/R8, sun8i-a23-a33.dtsi for the A23 and
A33, etc.)

quoted

b) It is not even helpful. If I got Maxime correctly, then the newer
sunxi generation numbers depend on the ARM _cores_ used in the SoC,
which is frankly the least interesting part from a Linux support
perspective. I would see some sense if it would reflect the generation
of IP blocks used, but so it is even more confusing to see that
sun7i-a20 and sun8i-a23 are related, but sun8i-h3 is a completely
different beast. The Allwinner marketing name tells you that, but the
sunxi one does not.

The opposite can be said too.

The A31 is quite different from the A33, while the A83 is much closer
to the H3 than it is to the A80. Their marketing scheme is messy. In
all aspects. We have a scheme that worked, I'd really like to stick
with it.

quoted

c) It is very confusing for people not dealing with it everyday. Just
because I own a BananaPi I know that the A20 is sun7i, but I am totally
lost when it comes to all the other names. And even now it took me about
a minute to find the appropriate Wiki page which explains part of that
story.
d) Most importantly ;-): It kills TAB completion, unless you know the
sunxi number, which is mostly not true as pointed out in c)

Both of these are true, but are about the DT filenames, and not the
compatibles. I'd agree with you on this one now that we have
per-vendor subfolders in boot/dts, but it was not the case before, and
I'm pretty sure that to anyone that is not aware of the Allwinner SoCs
names, having an A<number>.dtsi in arch/arm/boot/dts, it would be
about a Cortex-A<number>, and definitely not an SoC from some random
vendor.

So, droping it in the filenames, why not. But I'd really like to keep
the same compatible scheme.

If we do end up dropping it from the filenames, can you (André) update
MAINTAINERS to add "arch/arm64/boot/dts/sunxi/" to the sunxi entry?

Thanks.
ChenYu

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "linux-sunxi" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.