[v9,0/3] SDM670 Pin Control Driver

Changes since v8:
 - change dt schema description (1/3)
 - change comment (2/3)
 - remove reference to generic pinctrl (1/3)
 - change to double quotes (1/3)

Changes since v7:
 - remove complement_fw_reserved_gpios from patch 3

Changes since v6:
 - remove bitmap_fill() call completely (original commit was 4c0efbfb2669
   ("pinctrl: msm: Add ability for drivers to supply a reserved GPIO list"),
   original author CC'd)
 - group some entries in pingroup arrays for less lines
 - accumulate review tags

Changes since v5:
 - remove function requirement in schema
 - change "-state$" regex to double quotes in schema
 - drop quotes from qcom-tlmm-state ref in dt schema

Changes since v4:
 - accumulate review tag
 - use --cover-letter
 - this is effectively a resend

Changes since v3:
 - constrain gpio-reserved-ranges to 1-75 items
 - proper indentation in dt-bindings example (actually tagged this time
   instead of an outdated commit)
 - remove unnecessary commit reference
 - rename complement_fw_reserved_gpios -> complement_fw_gpio_ranges

Changes since v2:
 - remove quotes from pinctrl.yaml# in dt-bindings
 - constrain gpio-reserved-ranges to 1-76 items (includes ufs_reset)
 - indentation in dt-bindings example
 - cite downstream kernel source
 - remove MODULE_AUTHOR (most imported pinctrl drivers don't have this)

Changes since v1:
 - add a field in msm_pinctrl_soc_data to accomodate the needs of the
   driver and device dts
 - apply changes made to existing tlmm dt documentation
 - add reserved gpios array
 - rename device tree compat string to qcom,sdm670-tlmm
 - remove dependency on ACPI
 - move MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE macro call up
 - add missing pins (fixes most of the debugfs problems)
 - move qup0_pins down
 - add whitespace between UFS_RESET macro and pins array

This patch series adds the driver for the Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 TLMM
(Top-Level Mode Multiplexer) and introduces a new field so that SDM670-
related device trees can reserve their own gpios.

Richard Acayan (3):
  dt-bindings: pinctrl: qcom: add sdm670 pinctrl
  pinctrl: qcom: do not reinitialize gpio valid mask
  pinctrl: qcom: add sdm670 pinctrl

 .../bindings/pinctrl/qcom,sdm670-tlmm.yaml    |  127 ++
 drivers/pinctrl/qcom/Kconfig                  |    9 +
 drivers/pinctrl/qcom/Makefile                 |    1 +
 drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-msm.c            |    3 +-
 drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-sdm670.c         | 1345 +++++++++++++++++
 5 files changed, 1483 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/qcom,sdm670-tlmm.yaml
 create mode 100644 drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-sdm670.c

> On Fri, 07 Oct 2022, Richard Acayan wrote:
> > Richard Acayan (3):
> >   dt-bindings: pinctrl: qcom: add sdm670 pinctrl
> >   pinctrl: qcom: do not reinitialize gpio valid mask
> >   pinctrl: qcom: add sdm670 pinctrl
> > 
> >  .../bindings/pinctrl/qcom,sdm670-tlmm.yaml    |  127 ++
> >  drivers/pinctrl/qcom/Kconfig                  |    9 +
> >  drivers/pinctrl/qcom/Makefile                 |    1 +
> >  drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-msm.c            |    3 +-
> >  drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-sdm670.c         | 1345 +++++++++++++++++
> 
> And I'm receiving this because ... ?

You wrote a patch a few years ago, then supposedly changed your email, and I
wanted to know if there's anything we should consider before removing some of
the code you wrote for it (in patch 2). After I added you as a recipient, it got
a review tag, so I don't know what input you can give now (unless it's
important). My bad for not removing you yet.

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20190610084213.1052-3-lee.jones@linaro.org/

> 
> >  5 files changed, 1483 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/qcom,sdm670-tlmm.yaml
> >  create mode 100644 drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-sdm670.c
> >

On Mon, 10 Oct 2022, Richard Acayan wrote:

> > On Fri, 07 Oct 2022, Richard Acayan wrote:
> > > Richard Acayan (3):
> > >   dt-bindings: pinctrl: qcom: add sdm670 pinctrl
> > >   pinctrl: qcom: do not reinitialize gpio valid mask
> > >   pinctrl: qcom: add sdm670 pinctrl
> > > 
> > >  .../bindings/pinctrl/qcom,sdm670-tlmm.yaml    |  127 ++
> > >  drivers/pinctrl/qcom/Kconfig                  |    9 +
> > >  drivers/pinctrl/qcom/Makefile                 |    1 +
> > >  drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-msm.c            |    3 +-
> > >  drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-sdm670.c         | 1345 +++++++++++++++++
> > 
> > And I'm receiving this because ... ?
> 
> You wrote a patch a few years ago, then supposedly changed your email, and I
> wanted to know if there's anything we should consider before removing some of
> the code you wrote for it (in patch 2). After I added you as a recipient, it got
> a review tag, so I don't know what input you can give now (unless it's
> important). My bad for not removing you yet.

Actually that is a perfectly valid reason.  Thank you for the
clarification.  I (used to) receive 100's of reviews a week for
drivers that either have nothing to do with me or because I conducted
some basic clean-up / fixed warnings, etc.  Since I changed my email
address, things have improved a great deal, which is why this stood
out.

So I believe that patch was written to support one of the Lenovo
laptops booting in ACPI mode.  Please see sdm845_acpi_reserved_gpios
for reference.  Please ensure your patch does not break this
use-case.

Bjorn (who has now reviewed) would know this best.