Re: [RFC PATCH v2] ARM: dts: stm32: change pinctrl bindings definition

2017-07-26 Thread Benjamin Gaignard
2017-07-26 13:03 GMT+02:00 Patrice CHOTARD : > Hi Alex > > On 07/21/2017 02:34 PM, Alexandre Torgue wrote: >> Initially each pin was declared in "include/dt-bindings/stm32f429-pinfunc.h" >> and each definition contained SOC names (ex: STM32F429_PA9_FUNC_USART1_TX). >> Since

Re: [RFC PATCH v2] ARM: dts: stm32: change pinctrl bindings definition

2017-07-26 Thread Benjamin Gaignard
2017-07-26 13:03 GMT+02:00 Patrice CHOTARD : > Hi Alex > > On 07/21/2017 02:34 PM, Alexandre Torgue wrote: >> Initially each pin was declared in "include/dt-bindings/stm32f429-pinfunc.h" >> and each definition contained SOC names (ex: STM32F429_PA9_FUNC_USART1_TX). >> Since this approach was

Re: [RFC PATCH v2] ARM: dts: stm32: change pinctrl bindings definition

2017-07-26 Thread Patrice CHOTARD
Hi Alex On 07/21/2017 02:34 PM, Alexandre Torgue wrote: > Initially each pin was declared in "include/dt-bindings/stm32f429-pinfunc.h" > and each definition contained SOC names (ex: STM32F429_PA9_FUNC_USART1_TX). > Since this approach was approved, the number of supported MCU has > increased

Re: [RFC PATCH v2] ARM: dts: stm32: change pinctrl bindings definition

2017-07-26 Thread Patrice CHOTARD
Hi Alex On 07/21/2017 02:34 PM, Alexandre Torgue wrote: > Initially each pin was declared in "include/dt-bindings/stm32f429-pinfunc.h" > and each definition contained SOC names (ex: STM32F429_PA9_FUNC_USART1_TX). > Since this approach was approved, the number of supported MCU has > increased

Re: [RFC PATCH v2] ARM: dts: stm32: change pinctrl bindings definition

2017-07-21 Thread Vikas Manocha
Looks good, On 07/21/2017 05:34 AM, Alexandre Torgue wrote: > Initially each pin was declared in "include/dt-bindings/stm32f429-pinfunc.h" > and each definition contained SOC names (ex: STM32F429_PA9_FUNC_USART1_TX). > Since this approach was approved, the number of supported MCU has > increased

Re: [RFC PATCH v2] ARM: dts: stm32: change pinctrl bindings definition

2017-07-21 Thread Vikas Manocha
Looks good, On 07/21/2017 05:34 AM, Alexandre Torgue wrote: > Initially each pin was declared in "include/dt-bindings/stm32f429-pinfunc.h" > and each definition contained SOC names (ex: STM32F429_PA9_FUNC_USART1_TX). > Since this approach was approved, the number of supported MCU has > increased

[RFC PATCH v2] ARM: dts: stm32: change pinctrl bindings definition

2017-07-21 Thread Alexandre Torgue
Initially each pin was declared in "include/dt-bindings/stm32f429-pinfunc.h" and each definition contained SOC names (ex: STM32F429_PA9_FUNC_USART1_TX). Since this approach was approved, the number of supported MCU has increased (STM32F429/STM32F469/STM32f746/STM32H743). To avoid to add a new file

[RFC PATCH v2] ARM: dts: stm32: change pinctrl bindings definition

2017-07-21 Thread Alexandre Torgue
Initially each pin was declared in "include/dt-bindings/stm32f429-pinfunc.h" and each definition contained SOC names (ex: STM32F429_PA9_FUNC_USART1_TX). Since this approach was approved, the number of supported MCU has increased (STM32F429/STM32F469/STM32f746/STM32H743). To avoid to add a new file

[RFC PATCH v2] ARM: dts: stm32: change pinctrl bindings definition

2017-07-21 Thread Alexandre Torgue
Initially each pin was declared in "include/dt-bindings/stm32f429-pinfunc.h" and each definition contained SOC names (ex: STM32F429_PA9_FUNC_USART1_TX). Since this approach was approved, the number of supported MCU has increased (STM32F429/STM32F469/STM32f746/STM32H743). To avoid to add a new file

[RFC PATCH v2] ARM: dts: stm32: change pinctrl bindings definition

2017-07-21 Thread Alexandre Torgue
Initially each pin was declared in "include/dt-bindings/stm32f429-pinfunc.h" and each definition contained SOC names (ex: STM32F429_PA9_FUNC_USART1_TX). Since this approach was approved, the number of supported MCU has increased (STM32F429/STM32F469/STM32f746/STM32H743). To avoid to add a new file