Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: bindings: pinctrl: Add support for TI's IODelay configuration

2015-04-15 Thread Nishanth Menon
On 04/15/2015 01:44 PM, Lennart Sorensen wrote: > On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 11:51:32AM -0500, Nishanth Menon wrote: >> I am yet to post a new revision to this series - few other stuff got >> in the way. IODelay driver in no way removes the constraint that the >> SoC architecture has - most of the pin

Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: bindings: pinctrl: Add support for TI's IODelay configuration

2015-04-15 Thread Lennart Sorensen
On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 11:51:32AM -0500, Nishanth Menon wrote: > I am yet to post a new revision to this series - few other stuff got > in the way. IODelay driver in no way removes the constraint that the > SoC architecture has - most of the pins still need to be muxed in > bootloader - we cannot

Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: bindings: pinctrl: Add support for TI's IODelay configuration

2015-04-15 Thread Nishanth Menon
On 04/14/2015 08:29 PM, Lennart Sorensen wrote: > On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 06:41:51PM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: >> Yeah agreed. I suggest discussing the binding and the generic >> parsing code for it first :) >> >> It seems with the generic binding the actual driver should be >> just the hardwar

Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: bindings: pinctrl: Add support for TI's IODelay configuration

2015-04-14 Thread Lennart Sorensen
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 06:41:51PM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: > Yeah agreed. I suggest discussing the binding and the generic > parsing code for it first :) > > It seems with the generic binding the actual driver should be > just the hardware specific code hopefully. Did this thread go anywhere

Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: bindings: pinctrl: Add support for TI's IODelay configuration

2015-03-17 Thread Tony Lindgren
* Linus Walleij [150317 18:31]: > On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 7:33 PM, Nishanth Menon wrote: > > On 03/10/2015 12:31 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > >> Yes except I'd make use of some kind of #pinctrl-cells here just like > >> interrupt controller has #interrupt-cells. Then you can have the values > >>

Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: bindings: pinctrl: Add support for TI's IODelay configuration

2015-03-17 Thread Linus Walleij
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 7:33 PM, Nishanth Menon wrote: > On 03/10/2015 12:31 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: >> Yes except I'd make use of some kind of #pinctrl-cells here just like >> interrupt controller has #interrupt-cells. Then you can have the values >> seprate and the controller knows what to do

Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: bindings: pinctrl: Add support for TI's IODelay configuration

2015-03-10 Thread Nishanth Menon
On 03/10/2015 01:33 PM, Nishanth Menon wrote: > On 03/10/2015 12:31 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: >> * Nishanth Menon [150310 10:25]: >>> On 03/10/2015 10:33 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote: * Linus Walleij [150310 03:39]: > On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 1:00 AM, Nishanth Menon wrote: > >> +Configu

Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: bindings: pinctrl: Add support for TI's IODelay configuration

2015-03-10 Thread Nishanth Menon
On 03/10/2015 12:31 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Nishanth Menon [150310 10:25]: >> On 03/10/2015 10:33 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote: >>> * Linus Walleij [150310 03:39]: On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 1:00 AM, Nishanth Menon wrote: > +Configuration definition follows similar model as the pinctrl

Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: bindings: pinctrl: Add support for TI's IODelay configuration

2015-03-10 Thread Tony Lindgren
* Nishanth Menon [150310 10:25]: > On 03/10/2015 10:33 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > * Linus Walleij [150310 03:39]: > >> On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 1:00 AM, Nishanth Menon wrote: > >> > >>> +Configuration definition follows similar model as the pinctrl-single: > >>> +The groups of pin configuration

Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: bindings: pinctrl: Add support for TI's IODelay configuration

2015-03-10 Thread Nishanth Menon
On 03/10/2015 10:33 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Linus Walleij [150310 03:39]: >> On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 1:00 AM, Nishanth Menon wrote: >> >>> +Configuration definition follows similar model as the pinctrl-single: >>> +The groups of pin configuration are defined under "pinctrl-single,pins" >>> +

Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: bindings: pinctrl: Add support for TI's IODelay configuration

2015-03-10 Thread Tony Lindgren
* Linus Walleij [150310 03:39]: > On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 1:00 AM, Nishanth Menon wrote: > > > +Configuration definition follows similar model as the pinctrl-single: > > +The groups of pin configuration are defined under "pinctrl-single,pins" > > + > > +&dra7_iodelay_core { > > + mmc2_iodel

Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: bindings: pinctrl: Add support for TI's IODelay configuration

2015-03-10 Thread Nishanth Menon
On 03/10/2015 05:39 AM, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 1:00 AM, Nishanth Menon wrote: > >> +Configuration definition follows similar model as the pinctrl-single: >> +The groups of pin configuration are defined under "pinctrl-single,pins" >> + >> +&dra7_iodelay_core { >> + mmc

Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: bindings: pinctrl: Add support for TI's IODelay configuration

2015-03-10 Thread Linus Walleij
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 1:00 AM, Nishanth Menon wrote: > +Configuration definition follows similar model as the pinctrl-single: > +The groups of pin configuration are defined under "pinctrl-single,pins" > + > +&dra7_iodelay_core { > + mmc2_iodelay_3v3_conf: mmc2_iodelay_3v3_conf { > +

[PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: bindings: pinctrl: Add support for TI's IODelay configuration

2015-03-03 Thread Nishanth Menon
SoCs such as DRA7 family from Texas Instruments also include a highly configurable hardware block called the IOdelay block. This block allows very specific custom fine tuning for electrical characteristics of IO pins. In addition to the regular pin muxing modes supported by the pinctrl-single, add