[v3,03/11] dt-bindings: pinctrl: sun4i-a10: add Allwinner B288

The B288 driver takes its mux values from the DT, so allwinner,pinmux
becomes an allowed property here, required for this compatible only.

Signed-off-by: Pablo Mazzini <pmazzini@gmail.com>
---
 .../pinctrl/allwinner,sun4i-a10-pinctrl.yaml  | 22 +++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)
  

On Mon, Oct 05, 2026 at 09:27:23PM +0100, Pablo Mazzini wrote:
> The B288 driver takes its mux values from the DT, so allwinner,pinmux
> becomes an allowed property here, required for this compatible only.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Pablo Mazzini <pmazzini@gmail.com>
> ---
>  .../pinctrl/allwinner,sun4i-a10-pinctrl.yaml  | 22 +++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/allwinner,sun4i-a10-pinctrl.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/allwinner,sun4i-a10-pinctrl.yaml
> index 45b7a0b6c626..b1f093d218f5 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/allwinner,sun4i-a10-pinctrl.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/allwinner,sun4i-a10-pinctrl.yaml
> @@ -39,6 +39,7 @@ properties:
>        - allwinner,sun8i-a33-pinctrl
>        - allwinner,sun8i-a83t-pinctrl
>        - allwinner,sun8i-a83t-r-pinctrl
> +      - allwinner,sun8i-b288-pinctrl
>        - allwinner,sun8i-h3-pinctrl
>        - allwinner,sun8i-h3-r-pinctrl
>        - allwinner,sun8i-r40-pinctrl
> @@ -120,6 +121,15 @@ patternProperties:
>          $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
>          enum: [10, 20, 30, 40]
>  
> +      allwinner,pinmux:
> +        $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32-array
> +        description:
> +          Pinmux selector value, for each pin. Only used by SoCs whose
> +          driver takes the mux values from the DT instead of an in-driver
> +          table. Almost every time this value is the same for all pins, so
> +          any array shorter than the number of pins will repeat the last
> +          value, to allow just specifying a single cell, for all cells.

Perhaps new platforms should move to the common 'pinmux' property?

Rob
  

Hi Rob,

The B288 uses the same scheme as the A523, and the A733 queued for
7.4, which the shared pinctrl-sunxi-dt helper parses, so I'd rather
stay consistent with them.
Andre, what do you think?

Thanks,
Pablo

On Wed, Oct 7, 2026 at 10:16 PM Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 05, 2026 at 09:27:23PM +0100, Pablo Mazzini wrote:
> > The B288 driver takes its mux values from the DT, so allwinner,pinmux
> > becomes an allowed property here, required for this compatible only.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Pablo Mazzini <pmazzini@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >  .../pinctrl/allwinner,sun4i-a10-pinctrl.yaml  | 22 +++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/allwinner,sun4i-a10-pinctrl.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/allwinner,sun4i-a10-pinctrl.yaml
> > index 45b7a0b6c626..b1f093d218f5 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/allwinner,sun4i-a10-pinctrl.yaml
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/allwinner,sun4i-a10-pinctrl.yaml
> > @@ -39,6 +39,7 @@ properties:
> >        - allwinner,sun8i-a33-pinctrl
> >        - allwinner,sun8i-a83t-pinctrl
> >        - allwinner,sun8i-a83t-r-pinctrl
> > +      - allwinner,sun8i-b288-pinctrl
> >        - allwinner,sun8i-h3-pinctrl
> >        - allwinner,sun8i-h3-r-pinctrl
> >        - allwinner,sun8i-r40-pinctrl
> > @@ -120,6 +121,15 @@ patternProperties:
> >          $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
> >          enum: [10, 20, 30, 40]
> >
> > +      allwinner,pinmux:
> > +        $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32-array
> > +        description:
> > +          Pinmux selector value, for each pin. Only used by SoCs whose
> > +          driver takes the mux values from the DT instead of an in-driver
> > +          table. Almost every time this value is the same for all pins, so
> > +          any array shorter than the number of pins will repeat the last
> > +          value, to allow just specifying a single cell, for all cells.
>
> Perhaps new platforms should move to the common 'pinmux' property?
>
> Rob
  

Hi,

On 10/7/26 23:16, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 05, 2026 at 09:27:23PM +0100, Pablo Mazzini wrote:
>> The B288 driver takes its mux values from the DT, so allwinner,pinmux
>> becomes an allowed property here, required for this compatible only.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pablo Mazzini <pmazzini@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>   .../pinctrl/allwinner,sun4i-a10-pinctrl.yaml  | 22 +++++++++++++++++++
>>   1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/allwinner,sun4i-a10-pinctrl.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/allwinner,sun4i-a10-pinctrl.yaml
>> index 45b7a0b6c626..b1f093d218f5 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/allwinner,sun4i-a10-pinctrl.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/allwinner,sun4i-a10-pinctrl.yaml
>> @@ -39,6 +39,7 @@ properties:
>>         - allwinner,sun8i-a33-pinctrl
>>         - allwinner,sun8i-a83t-pinctrl
>>         - allwinner,sun8i-a83t-r-pinctrl
>> +      - allwinner,sun8i-b288-pinctrl
>>         - allwinner,sun8i-h3-pinctrl
>>         - allwinner,sun8i-h3-r-pinctrl
>>         - allwinner,sun8i-r40-pinctrl
>> @@ -120,6 +121,15 @@ patternProperties:
>>           $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
>>           enum: [10, 20, 30, 40]
>>   
>> +      allwinner,pinmux:
>> +        $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32-array
>> +        description:
>> +          Pinmux selector value, for each pin. Only used by SoCs whose
>> +          driver takes the mux values from the DT instead of an in-driver
>> +          table. Almost every time this value is the same for all pins, so
>> +          any array shorter than the number of pins will repeat the last
>> +          value, to allow just specifying a single cell, for all cells.
> 
> Perhaps new platforms should move to the common 'pinmux' property?

If you mean to just drop the allwinner prefix: this has been discussed, 
but NAKed, because the generic property carries a different semantic. 
And implementing that generic behaviour in the existing sunxi pinctrl 
driver would be quite some effort (read: a rewrite), without any obvious 
win, so we decided back then to not boil the ocean here, and just go 
with a special property.

Cheers,
Andre
  

On Thu, Oct 8, 2026 at 9:50 AM Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com> wrote:

> If you mean to just drop the allwinner prefix: this has been discussed,
> but NAKed, because the generic property carries a different semantic.
> And implementing that generic behaviour in the existing sunxi pinctrl
> driver would be quite some effort (read: a rewrite), without any obvious
> win, so we decided back then to not boil the ocean here, and just go
> with a special property.

The point to switch over to the generic "pinmux" property would be
when a completely new SoC series with new hardware arrives, so that
it is significantly different from earlier iterations.

I don't know which semantic with the standard "pinmux" property you
got hung up on though remind me?

The bindings just state this:

  pinmux:
    description:
      The list of numeric pin ids and their mux settings that properties in the
      node apply to (either this, "pins" or "groups" have to be specified)
    $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32-array

It's just an opaque u32 array controlling all muxing for a device.
There could be one single element in the array.

Yours,
Linus Walleij
  

Hi Linus,

On 10/8/26 11:21, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2026 at 9:50 AM Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com> wrote:
> 
>> If you mean to just drop the allwinner prefix: this has been discussed,
>> but NAKed, because the generic property carries a different semantic.
>> And implementing that generic behaviour in the existing sunxi pinctrl
>> driver would be quite some effort (read: a rewrite), without any obvious
>> win, so we decided back then to not boil the ocean here, and just go
>> with a special property.
> 
> The point to switch over to the generic "pinmux" property would be
> when a completely new SoC series with new hardware arrives, so that
> it is significantly different from earlier iterations.
> 
> I don't know which semantic with the standard "pinmux" property you
> got hung up on though remind me?
> 
> The bindings just state this:
> 
>    pinmux:
>      description:
>        The list of numeric pin ids and their mux settings that properties in the

                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

it combines the pin number *and* its pinmux. For allwinner,pinmux we 
just carry the pinmux bits. The generic binding makes a lot of sense, 
it's just not very appealing to the existing sunxi pinctrl driver.

Cheers,
Andre

>        node apply to (either this, "pins" or "groups" have to be specified)
>      $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32-array
> 
> It's just an opaque u32 array controlling all muxing for a device.
> There could be one single element in the array.
> 
> Yours,
> Linus Walleij