From: James Hogan <james.hogan@imgtec.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] pinctrl: remove slew-rate parameter from tz1090
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 14:05:05 +0100
Message-ID: <51C99581.2010403@imgtec.com>
References: <201306251455.01540.heiko@sntech.de> <201306251456.36499.heiko@sntech.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <201306251456.36499.heiko@sntech.de>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: =?UTF-8?B?SGVpa28gU3TDvGJuZXI=?= <heiko@sntech.de>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>, Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org>, Rob Herring <rob.herring@calxeda.com>
List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org

Hi Heiko,

On 25/06/13 13:56, Heiko St=C3=BCbner wrote:
> As the binding for slew-rate is under discussion and seems to need
> more tought it will get removed for now, so it doesn't get an offical

s/tought/thought/
s/offical/official/

> release.
>=20
> Therefore remove it again from the only current user, tz1090.
>=20
> Signed-off-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>
> ---

<snip>

> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-tz1090-pdc.c b/drivers/pinctrl/p=
inctrl-tz1090-pdc.c
> index 12e4808..d4f12cc 100644
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-tz1090-pdc.c
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-tz1090-pdc.c
> @@ -809,11 +809,6 @@ static int tz1090_pdc_pinconf_group_reg(struct p=
inctrl_dev *pctldev,
>  		*width =3D 1;
>  		*map =3D tz1090_pdc_boolean_map;
>  		break;
> -	case PIN_CONFIG_SLEW_RATE:
> -		*shift =3D REG_GPIO_CONTROL2_PDC_SR_S;
> -		*width =3D 1;
> -		*map =3D tz1090_pdc_boolean_map;
> -		break;
>  	case PIN_CONFIG_DRIVE_STRENGTH:
>  		*shift =3D REG_GPIO_CONTROL2_PDC_DR_S;
>  		*width =3D 2;
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-tz1090.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinct=
rl-tz1090.c
> index 02ff3a2..4edae08 100644
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-tz1090.c
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-tz1090.c
> @@ -1834,11 +1834,6 @@ static int tz1090_pinconf_group_reg(struct pin=
ctrl_dev *pctldev,
>  		*width =3D 1;
>  		*map =3D tz1090_boolean_map;
>  		break;
> -	case PIN_CONFIG_SLEW_RATE:
> -		*reg =3D REG_PINCTRL_SR;
> -		*width =3D 1;
> -		*map =3D tz1090_boolean_map;
> -		break;
>  	case PIN_CONFIG_DRIVE_STRENGTH:
>  		*reg =3D REG_PINCTRL_DR;
>  		*width =3D 2;
>=20

I don't see the harm in keeping the handling of PIN_CONFIG_SLEW_RATE,
since PIN_CONFIG_SLEW_RATE is still present and you only seem to be
removing the device tree bindings (which is the only important bit from
the DT ABI point of view).

Cheers
James