[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090518085710.GE14595@buzzloop.caiaq.de>
Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 10:57:10 +0200
From: Daniel Mack <daniel@...aq.de>
To: Ben Dooks <ben-linux@...ff.org>
Cc: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
'LKML' <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk, kyungmin.park@...sung.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [drivers] [SPI] SPI_GPIO: add support for controllers
with missing MISO pin
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 09:34:12AM +0100, Ben Dooks wrote:
> > > > static inline int getmiso(const struct spi_device *spi)
> > > > {
> > > > - return !!gpio_get_value(SPI_MISO_GPIO);
> > > > + if (SPI_MISO_GPIO)
> > > > + return !!gpio_get_value(SPI_MISO_GPIO);
> > > > + else
> > > > + return 0;
> > > > }
> > >
> > > Is zero a good approximation for 'no gpio' ?
> >
> > Now I found that zero might be a valid gpio pin number on some architectures
> > (it just means GPIO0 pin). This is imho a bit strange behavior of gpiolib as
> > there should be also a special values for INVALID or NOGPIO cases. Does
> > anyone have any ideas how such cases should be handled properly?
>
> I belive there is a gpio_is_valid() function to tell you precisely if the
> given GPIO is valid.
And then -1 can be passed in from the platform data which will fail the
gpio_is_valid() test.
Daniel
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists