|
@@ -0,0 +1,128 @@
|
|
|
+== Introduction ==
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+Hardware modules that control pin multiplexing or configuration parameters
|
|
|
+such as pull-up/down, tri-state, drive-strength etc are designated as pin
|
|
|
+controllers. Each pin controller must be represented as a node in device tree,
|
|
|
+just like any other hardware module.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+Hardware modules whose signals are affected by pin configuration are
|
|
|
+designated client devices. Again, each client device must be represented as a
|
|
|
+node in device tree, just like any other hardware module.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+For a client device to operate correctly, certain pin controllers must
|
|
|
+set up certain specific pin configurations. Some client devices need a
|
|
|
+single static pin configuration, e.g. set up during initialization. Others
|
|
|
+need to reconfigure pins at run-time, for example to tri-state pins when the
|
|
|
+device is inactive. Hence, each client device can define a set of named
|
|
|
+states. The number and names of those states is defined by the client device's
|
|
|
+own binding.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+The common pinctrl bindings defined in this file provide an infrastructure
|
|
|
+for client device device tree nodes to map those state names to the pin
|
|
|
+configuration used by those states.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+Note that pin controllers themselves may also be client devices of themselves.
|
|
|
+For example, a pin controller may set up its own "active" state when the
|
|
|
+driver loads. This would allow representing a board's static pin configuration
|
|
|
+in a single place, rather than splitting it across multiple client device
|
|
|
+nodes. The decision to do this or not somewhat rests with the author of
|
|
|
+individual board device tree files, and any requirements imposed by the
|
|
|
+bindings for the individual client devices in use by that board, i.e. whether
|
|
|
+they require certain specific named states for dynamic pin configuration.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+== Pinctrl client devices ==
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+For each client device individually, every pin state is assigned an integer
|
|
|
+ID. These numbers start at 0, and are contiguous. For each state ID, a unique
|
|
|
+property exists to define the pin configuration. Each state may also be
|
|
|
+assigned a name. When names are used, another property exists to map from
|
|
|
+those names to the integer IDs.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+Each client device's own binding determines the set of states the must be
|
|
|
+defined in its device tree node, and whether to define the set of state
|
|
|
+IDs that must be provided, or whether to define the set of state names that
|
|
|
+must be provided.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+Required properties:
|
|
|
+pinctrl-0: List of phandles, each pointing at a pin configuration
|
|
|
+ node. These referenced pin configuration nodes must be child
|
|
|
+ nodes of the pin controller that they configure. Multiple
|
|
|
+ entries may exist in this list so that multiple pin
|
|
|
+ controllers may be configured, or so that a state may be built
|
|
|
+ from multiple nodes for a single pin controller, each
|
|
|
+ contributing part of the overall configuration. See the next
|
|
|
+ section of this document for details of the format of these
|
|
|
+ pin configuration nodes.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ In some cases, it may be useful to define a state, but for it
|
|
|
+ to be empty. This may be required when a common IP block is
|
|
|
+ used in an SoC either without a pin controller, or where the
|
|
|
+ pin controller does not affect the HW module in question. If
|
|
|
+ the binding for that IP block requires certain pin states to
|
|
|
+ exist, they must still be defined, but may be left empty.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+Optional properties:
|
|
|
+pinctrl-1: List of phandles, each pointing at a pin configuration
|
|
|
+ node within a pin controller.
|
|
|
+...
|
|
|
+pinctrl-n: List of phandles, each pointing at a pin configuration
|
|
|
+ node within a pin controller.
|
|
|
+pinctrl-names: The list of names to assign states. List entry 0 defines the
|
|
|
+ name for integer state ID 0, list entry 1 for state ID 1, and
|
|
|
+ so on.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+For example:
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ /* For a client device requiring named states */
|
|
|
+ device {
|
|
|
+ pinctrl-names = "active", "idle";
|
|
|
+ pinctrl-0 = <&state_0_node_a>;
|
|
|
+ pinctrl-1 = <&state_1_node_a &state_1_node_b>;
|
|
|
+ };
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ /* For the same device if using state IDs */
|
|
|
+ device {
|
|
|
+ pinctrl-0 = <&state_0_node_a>;
|
|
|
+ pinctrl-1 = <&state_1_node_a &state_1_node_b>;
|
|
|
+ };
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ /*
|
|
|
+ * For an IP block whose binding supports pin configuration,
|
|
|
+ * but in use on an SoC that doesn't have any pin control hardware
|
|
|
+ */
|
|
|
+ device {
|
|
|
+ pinctrl-names = "active", "idle";
|
|
|
+ pinctrl-0 = <>;
|
|
|
+ pinctrl-1 = <>;
|
|
|
+ };
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+== Pin controller devices ==
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+Pin controller devices should contain the pin configuration nodes that client
|
|
|
+devices reference.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+For example:
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ pincontroller {
|
|
|
+ ... /* Standard DT properties for the device itself elided */
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ state_0_node_a {
|
|
|
+ ...
|
|
|
+ };
|
|
|
+ state_1_node_a {
|
|
|
+ ...
|
|
|
+ };
|
|
|
+ state_1_node_b {
|
|
|
+ ...
|
|
|
+ };
|
|
|
+ }
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+The contents of each of those pin configuration child nodes is defined
|
|
|
+entirely by the binding for the individual pin controller device. There
|
|
|
+exists no common standard for this content.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+The pin configuration nodes need not be direct children of the pin controller
|
|
|
+device; they may be grandchildren, for example. Whether this is legal, and
|
|
|
+whether there is any interaction between the child and intermediate parent
|
|
|
+nodes, is again defined entirely by the binding for the individual pin
|
|
|
+controller device.
|