[PATCH v2 2/3] pinctrl: Add msm8x74 configuration

[Bjorn Andersson]

On Mon 09 Dec 13:37 PST 2013, Stephen Boyd wrote:

> On 12/09/13 00:18, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 11:22 PM, Stephen Boyd <sboyd at codeaurora.org> wrote:
> >> On 12/05/13 18:10, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> > As the driver is merged I expect fixes to come in as additional patches.
> >
> >>> Add initial definition of parameters for pinctrl-msm for the msm8x74
> >>> platform.
> >> Hmm. We've tried to remove 'x' from our code because it isn't really
> >> accurate and leads to more confusion.
> > So does this pin controller have a real name in the data sheet?
> 
> We call it TLMM (top-level mode mux). So far there have been three major
> revisions of the hardware and 8974 uses the latest version.
> 

The pinctrl-msm.c driver would be the TLMM (v2 and v3) driver...

> >
> > I usually prefer to name the drivers after the name of the IP
> > block rather than the SoC if possible.
> >
> > Or should it just be named pinctrl-msm.c?
> 
> Leaving the pinctrl-msm.c file as in these patches is fine. For the SoC
> specific data files we should use the base chip name which in this case
> is 8974. I suppose the goal of pinctrl-msm8x74.c is to support 8974 and
> 8074 SoCs in the same file because they're almost exactly the same minus
> some pins losing their "modem" functions. Given that, the file names are
> fine but the binding and the data structures should be specific about
> which SoC we're talking about.

...and the pinctrl-msm8x74.c would be the data for SoCs matching that name.

Currently we know that 8074 is a 8974 without modem and the document I have
describing this incarnation of the SoC describes 8274, 8674 and 8974.

So as Stephen suggest; we could keep the name pinctrl-msm8x74.c as is and
we change the compatible to be explicit about this is qcom,msm8974-pinctrl.

That would give us room to handle any differences between 8074 and 8974 within
this file.

What do you say? Should I prepare a patch for this?

Regards,
Bjorn