[PATCH 3/4] pinctrl: remove slew-rate parameter from tz1090

[Stephen Warren]

On 06/25/2013 08:57 AM, James Hogan wrote:
> On 25/06/13 14:22, Linus Walleij wrote:
>> Can't we just try to come up with a patch that nails down the meaning of
>> slew rate in some meaningful manner then?
>>
>> So according to:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slew_rate
>> a proper expression for slew rate would be dV/dt i.e.
>> something like microvolts per microsecond (which then just
>> becomes volts/second).
>>
>> What we need to figure out is what range will be applicable within
>> reasonable doubt for current scenarios and the next few years.
>>
>> What are your datasheets specifying here, and what would be
>> a proper measure?
> 
> My datasheet says:
> 
> 0: slow (half frequency)
> 1: fast
> 
> I just got a reply back from a hardware engineer, who said that the
> relationship with the actual volts/usec will depend on both the drive
> strength and the load on the pad, and that a definite answer probably
> requires running a simulation.

Tegra is similar here. The docs just say (for a 2-bit field expressed in
binary) "Code 11 is the least slewing of the signal, code 00 is the
highest slewing of the signal".

I'm not sure that a generic parameter actually needs specific units. Why
can't we simply specify the units as HW-defined, even while using a
standardized DT property name and kernel-internal enum to represent the
concept of slew rate? Even the order of whether 0 or 3 is highest or
lowest need not be mandated by the spec?

Note also that Tegra has separate rising and falling slew-rate
configuration.

And the slew rate is influenced by a "low-power mode" setting.

And as for James, I imagine the actual dV/dT is influenced by the
voltage on the IO rail for a particular board, since I'm pretty sure we
have some IOs that can operate at multiple different voltages, simply
based on whatever voltage is supplied for that pin/block's VDD.