An extremely simplified pinctrl bindings proposal

[Linus Walleij]

On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Tony Lindgren <tony at atomide.com> wrote:

>> I actually had something like unnamed pins in the early patches
>> to register a bunch of anonymous pins ranges, so why not bring
>> it back in.
>
> Yeah it seems that the mux registers should be listed, it might
> require a little bit of thinking for cases where one register
> controls multiple pins. So maybe we need just a new entry for
> mux registers?

I'm not sure if I'm following completely, if this is inside the devicetree-based
driver file, would it work to just add a struct dentry * to the
pinctrl_desc where you put a per-driver file?

Or maybe add extern void pinctrl_add_debugfs(struct dentry *) that adds
a new file to the existing per-driver directory through the core and then
have this add that file?

Or did you mean that the core.c should be register-aware?

Yours,
Linus Walleij