On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 7:01 PM, jmondi <jac...@jmondi.org> wrote: > On Sun, May 07, 2017 at 09:52:49AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 4:53 PM, Andy Shevchenko >> <andy.shevche...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > Linus, for me it looks like better to revert that change, until we >> > will have clear picture why existing configuration parameters can't >> > work. >> >> Yeah I'll revert the binding for fixes.
> As it seems we won't be able to proceed with the currently proposed solution, > would that be acceptable now that we use the "pinmux" property to add > flags as BIDIR Can you explain what does this *electrically* mean? Second question, what makes it differ to what already exists? > and SWIO_[INPUT|OUTPUT] directly there? Ditto. > This was my original proposal, rejected because we were using the "pins" > property at the time. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
