[PATCH v5 00/15] pinctrl: introduce the concept of a GPIO pin function category

[Linus Walleij]

On Tue, Aug 19, 2025 at 8:31 PM Andy Shevchenko
<andy.shevchenko at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2025 at 4:02 PM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij at linaro.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 11:09 AM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl at bgdev.pl> wrote:

> > >       devres: provide devm_kmemdup_const()
> > >       pinctrl: ingenic: use struct pinfunction instead of struct function_desc
> > >       pinctrl: airoha: replace struct function_desc with struct pinfunction
> > >       pinctrl: mediatek: mt7988: use PINCTRL_PIN_FUNCTION()
> > >       pinctrl: mediatek: moore: replace struct function_desc with struct pinfunction
> > >       pinctrl: imx: don't access the pin function radix tree directly
> > >       pinctrl: keembay: release allocated memory in detach path
> > >       pinctrl: keembay: use a dedicated structure for the pinfunction description
> > >       pinctrl: constify pinmux_generic_get_function()
> > >       pinctrl: make struct pinfunction a pointer in struct function_desc
> > >       pinctrl: qcom: use generic pin function helpers
> > >       pinctrl: allow to mark pin functions as requestable GPIOs
> >
> > I applied these 12 patches as a starter so they can
> > stabilize in linux-next.
>
> Hmm... I'm still sure that we don't need to have a separate flags
> field, but since I am on vacation and will be able to look at this
> closer next week, I can't look closer to it.

The qualcomm 32bit platforms fail in next anyway so I dropped the patches
for now.

Both you and Bartosz are on vacation so let's let it rest for a week or two.

Yours,
Linus Walleij