On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 8:12 PM, Rob Herring <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 04:07:21PM +0200, Jacopo Mondi wrote:
>> + The allowed generic formats for a pin multiplexing sub-node are the
>> + following ones:
>> +
>> + node-1 {
>> + pinmux = <PIN_ID_AND_MUX>, <PIN_ID_AND_MUX>, ... ;
>> + GENERIC_PINCONFIG;
>
> What's GENERIC_PINCONFIG? I see this in some other binding docs, but not
> used anywhere. If this is a boolean property then get rid of the all
> caps. If this is a define, then don't use complex defines that expand to
> dts source.
I guess it is a wildcard for everything under the heading in
"Generic pin configuration node content"
in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/pinctrl-bindings.txt
I'm all for documenting it properly.
It's kind of useful, but I don't know the recent ambtions about being
formal with DT bindings. The GPIO bindings are just over the top
with BNF notation in its formalism. Dunno what is best here :/
Yours,
Linus Walleij
