Hi Mark,
On 11/16/2012 14:59, Bo Shen wrote:
On 11/16/2012 14:41, Mark Brown wrote:
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 02:33:50PM +0800, Bo Shen wrote:
On 11/16/2012 14:12, Mark Brown wrote:
No, this isn't what was meant - the idea is to send only the addition of pinctrl data as one patch, based off the ASoC branch instead of -next.
What is the pinctrl data? (This patch can be applied on
The data you're adding in the device tree!
sound/topic/atmel branch without any conflicts)
That's not helpful to anyone doing bisection if there's nothing defining the pin states, it means that the system won't be able to start the driver as the API call will fail.
The other one add pinctrl nodes, must based on -next, or else I don't know where should I add the pinctrl nodes.
What makes you say this?
For example, if I want to add pinctrl node ---<8--- ssc0 { pinctrl_ssc0_tx: ssc0_tx-0 { atmel,pins = <1 16 0x1 0x0 /* PB16 periph A */ 1 17 0x1 0x0 /* PB17 periph A */ 1 18 0x1 0x0>; /* PB18 periph A */ }; --->8--- This should be add into dtsi file as following ---<8--- ahb { apb { pinctrl { ssc0 { pinctrl_ssc0_tx } } } } --->8---
In the ASoC branch tree, I don't see any pinctrl related information. So, I say I don't know where should I add the pinctrl nodes.
May be I misunderstanding, do you mean I should only add as followign based on ASoC tree? And the upper go into pinctrl tree? ---<8--- ssc0: ssc@fffbc000 { compatible = "atmel,at91rm9200-ssc"; reg = <0xfffbc000 0x4000>; interrupts = <14 4 5>;
pinctrl-names = "default";pinctrl-0 = <&pinctrl_ssc0_tx &pinctrl_ssc0_rx>; status = "disable";}; --->8---
Any suggestion for this? what should I do with this patch for next?
Best Regards Bo Shen