Hi Dong,

On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 03:26:57PM +0800, Dong Aisheng wrote:

Hi Linus & j,

quoted

quoted

I just want to know if "output-enable" is the right name?
"output-buffer-enable"?

Great! Thanks!

On naming: if we need "output-buffer-enable" should we add
"input-buffer-enable" as well?

Currently we are using "input-enable" to pair with "output-enable",
but as you said, just "output-enable" when "output-high" and
"output-low" are there already seems a bit confusing.
At the same time "input-buffer-enable" seems to actually be just
electrically equivalent to "input-enable", so adding it is a bit of a
waste as well.

I see three options here:

1) Add "output-buffer-enable" and "input-buffer-enable"
we end up with
"output-high"
"output-low"
"input-enable"
"output-buffer-enable"
"input-buffer-enable"

2) Add "output-buffer-enable" only
we end up with
"output-high"
"output-low"
"input-enable"
"output-buffer-enable"

Binding may be confusing as in one case we use "output-buffer-enable"
while in the other "input-enable"

3) Add "output-enable" only
"output-high"
"output-low"
"input-enable"
"output-enable"

As you, I don't like "output-enable" that much but it pairs better with
"input-enable".

I'll let you and DT people decide on this, as it's really an ABI definition
problem and you have better judgment there.

What's the final decision of this?

I admit a was buying a bit of time and post-poned the gentle ping for
any final word on this. But since you're asking I'll second your
question :)

I saw the following revert patch in pinctrl-next but did not see a successive
patch to add output-enable back?

Still waiting to have a feedback on which properties to add, that's
why I have not sent anything yet.

Thanks
   j

IMX7ULP pinctrl driver is pending on this because it needs use both
input-enable and output-enable if we want to make them generic property.

commit b4d2ea2af95cb77e2f320e24da526280d4aa2f6b
Author: Linus Walleij [off-list ref]
Date:   Mon May 8 10:48:21 2017 +0200

    Revert "pinctrl: generic: Add bi-directional and output-enable"

    This reverts commit 8c58f1a7a4b6d1d723bf25fef9d842d5a11200d0.

    It turns out that applying these generic properties was
    premature: the properties used in the driver using this
    are of unclear electrical nature and the subject need to
    be discussed.

    Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij [off-list ref]

Regards
Dong Aisheng

quoted

quoted

quoted

I see commit 42d5a11200d0[1] has not been reverted yet as Andy asked
in some previous email.

I'm just overloaded. I sent that revert to Torvalds today.

Thank you. Didn't want to put pressure ;)

quoted

quoted

I can send another version of that patch with
only 'output-enable' if you wish.

That's what we want.

quoted

Once we reach consesus, I can then send v6 of our pin controller driver
based on that.

OK sounds like a plan.

Sorry for the mess, I'm just trying to get this right :/

Not a mess, and thanks for your effort in maintaining  all of this

Thanks
   j

quoted

Yours,
Linus Walleij