Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] pinctrl: renesas: rzg2l: Pass OEN pin names

[Lad, Prabhakar]

Hi Geert,

Thank you for the review.


On Wed, Jul 2, 2025 at 10:54 AM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi John, Prabhakar,
>
> On Wed, 2 Jul 2025 at 02:57, John Madieu <john.madieu.xa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > From: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Pass the OEN pin names via the SoC-specific hardware configuration
> > structure to allow reuse of rzv2h_oen_read() and rzv2h_oen_write()
> > on multiple SoCs.
> >
> > On the RZ/V2H(P) and RZ/G3E SoCs, the PFC_OEN register is located at the
> > same offset. However, the register controls different pins on each SoC.
> > Hardcoding the pin names in the common logic prevents reusability.
> >
> > Extend struct rzg2l_hwcfg to include an array of OEN pin names and its
> > length. Use these values in rzv2h_pin_to_oen_bit() to determine the bit
> > position dynamically based on the active SoC.
> >
> > This enables shared handling of OEN register access while accounting for
> > SoC-specific pin mappings.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Thanks for your patch!
>
> > --- a/drivers/pinctrl/renesas/pinctrl-rzg2l.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/renesas/pinctrl-rzg2l.c
> > @@ -257,6 +257,8 @@ enum rzg2l_iolh_index {
> >   * @func_base: base number for port function (see register PFC)
> >   * @oen_max_pin: the maximum pin number supporting output enable
> >   * @oen_max_port: the maximum port number supporting output enable
> > + * @oen_pin_names: array of pin names for output enable
> > + * @oen_pin_names_len: length of the oen_pin_names array
> >   */
> >  struct rzg2l_hwcfg {
> >         const struct rzg2l_register_offsets regs;
> > @@ -269,6 +271,8 @@ struct rzg2l_hwcfg {
> >         u8 func_base;
> >         u8 oen_max_pin;
> >         u8 oen_max_port;
> > +       const char * const *oen_pin_names;
> > +       u8 oen_pin_names_len;
>
> Please exchange the order of the members, so the u8 fits in the
> existing hole.
>
OK.

> However, I think you better drop this patch, and use the existing
> rzg2l_pinctrl_data.oen_{read,write]() abstraction instead.
>
Ok agreed, I will switch to that.

Cheers,
Prabhakar