From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from down.free-electrons.com ([37.187.137.238]:33494 "EHLO mail.free-electrons.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753736AbbFPNRN (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Jun 2015 09:17:13 -0400 Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 15:17:08 +0200 From: Thomas Petazzoni To: Andrew Lunn Cc: Linus Walleij , Jason Cooper , Sebastian Hesselbarth , Gregory Clement , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Tawfik Bayouk , Nadav Haklai , Lior Amsalem , stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/34] pinctrl: mvebu: armada-375: remove non-existing NAND re/we pins Message-ID: <20150616151708.7f07228d@free-electrons.com> In-Reply-To: <20150609165843.GB16778@lunn.ch> References: <1433868446-11028-1-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <1433868446-11028-4-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <20150609165843.GB16778@lunn.ch> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Dear Andrew Lunn, On Tue, 9 Jun 2015 18:58:43 +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote: > From armada-375.dtsi: > > nand_pins: nand-pins { > marvell,pins = "mpp0", "mpp1", "mpp2", > "mpp3", "mpp4", "mpp5", > "mpp6", "mpp7", "mpp8", > "mpp9", "mpp10", "mpp11", > "mpp12", "mpp13"; > marvell,function = "nand"; > }; > > Don't you also need to remove mpp9 and mpp10 from here? What does > pinctrl do when you ask for pins which are not a member of the > function? In fact, no. Look at the patch: MPP_MODE(9, MPP_FUNCTION(0x0, "gpio", NULL), - MPP_FUNCTION(0x1, "nf", "wen"), MPP_FUNCTION(0x2, "spi0", "sck"), MPP_FUNCTION(0x3, "spi1", "sck"), MPP_FUNCTION(0x5, "nand", "we")), MPP_MODE(10, MPP_FUNCTION(0x0, "gpio", NULL), - MPP_FUNCTION(0x1, "nf", "ren"), MPP_FUNCTION(0x2, "dram", "vttctrl"), MPP_FUNCTION(0x3, "led", "c1"), MPP_FUNCTION(0x5, "nand", "re"), See how both pins had a "nf" function (0x1) and a "nand" function (0x5). I didn't even notice that when doing the patch, so my commit log was slightly confusing. The "nf" functions were incorrect. The "nand" functions were correct, and already used by armada-375.dtsi. I have just tested NAND on Armada 375 DB with all the pinctrl patches applied, and it works fine (created a UBI device, with a volume, etc.). Best regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com (Thomas Petazzoni) Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 15:17:08 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 03/34] pinctrl: mvebu: armada-375: remove non-existing NAND re/we pins In-Reply-To: <20150609165843.GB16778@lunn.ch> References: <1433868446-11028-1-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <1433868446-11028-4-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <20150609165843.GB16778@lunn.ch> Message-ID: <20150616151708.7f07228d@free-electrons.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Dear Andrew Lunn, On Tue, 9 Jun 2015 18:58:43 +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote: > From armada-375.dtsi: > > nand_pins: nand-pins { > marvell,pins = "mpp0", "mpp1", "mpp2", > "mpp3", "mpp4", "mpp5", > "mpp6", "mpp7", "mpp8", > "mpp9", "mpp10", "mpp11", > "mpp12", "mpp13"; > marvell,function = "nand"; > }; > > Don't you also need to remove mpp9 and mpp10 from here? What does > pinctrl do when you ask for pins which are not a member of the > function? In fact, no. Look at the patch: MPP_MODE(9, MPP_FUNCTION(0x0, "gpio", NULL), - MPP_FUNCTION(0x1, "nf", "wen"), MPP_FUNCTION(0x2, "spi0", "sck"), MPP_FUNCTION(0x3, "spi1", "sck"), MPP_FUNCTION(0x5, "nand", "we")), MPP_MODE(10, MPP_FUNCTION(0x0, "gpio", NULL), - MPP_FUNCTION(0x1, "nf", "ren"), MPP_FUNCTION(0x2, "dram", "vttctrl"), MPP_FUNCTION(0x3, "led", "c1"), MPP_FUNCTION(0x5, "nand", "re"), See how both pins had a "nf" function (0x1) and a "nand" function (0x5). I didn't even notice that when doing the patch, so my commit log was slightly confusing. The "nf" functions were incorrect. The "nand" functions were correct, and already used by armada-375.dtsi. I have just tested NAND on Armada 375 DB with all the pinctrl patches applied, and it works fine (created a UBI device, with a volume, etc.). Best regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com