On Wed, Sep 06, 2023 at 04:56:56PM +0200, Michal Simek wrote: > > > On 9/6/23 04:40, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > > This DM-compliant driver deals with SCMI pinctrl protocol and presents > > gpio devices exposed by SCMI firmware (server). > > > > Signed-off-by: AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.aka...@linaro.org> > > --- > > drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-scmi.c | 544 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > > 1 file changed, 539 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-scmi.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-scmi.c > > index 3ebdad57b86c..73d385bdbfcc 100644 > > --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-scmi.c > > +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-scmi.c > > @@ -11,21 +11,20 @@ > > #include <malloc.h> > > #include <scmi_agent.h> > > #include <scmi_protocols.h> > > +#include <asm-generic/gpio.h> > > #include <dm/device_compat.h> > > +#include <dm/device-internal.h> > > +#include <dm/lists.h> > > #include <dm/pinctrl.h> > > /** > > * struct scmi_pin - attributes for a pin > > * @name: Name of pin > > - * @value: Value of pin > > - * @flags: A set of flags > > * @function: Function selected > > * @status: An array of status of configuration types > > */ > > struct scmi_pin { > > char *name; > > - u32 value; > > - u32 flags; > > > You have added this in 3/6 then there is no reason to remove it in this > version.
Right. It was my mistake in a last-minute cleanup. The hunk should be merged in 3/6. BTW, this part of code, holding status of every pin's pinconf properties locally, is a bit clumsy. I'd remove the whole code if possible. -Takahiro Akashi > M