[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090615191916.31d95ab7@dxy.sh.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 19:19:16 +0800
From: Alek Du <alek.du@...el.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
CC: Ben Dooks <ben-linux@...ff.org>,
Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpiolib: Add gpio_detect, gpio_debounce and
gpio_alt_func features to GPIOLIB
On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 18:02:53 +0800
Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 10:50:23AM +0100, Ben Dooks wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 05:15:02PM +0800, Alek Du wrote:
>
> > > * gpio_alt_func is to set pin as alternative function or GPIO.
>
> > gpio_alt_func is feature creep, I don't really belive this is the
> > best place to put it as it will be difficult to actually make this
> > generic for all gpio platforms.
>
> Since the proposed API just passes a value through to the driver for the
> GPIO chip it looks generic enough - each chip can define whatever set of
> constants it likes. I'd expect a large proportion of driver specific
> APIs would end up just the same.
>
> Given the number of manufacturers that don't use a separate term like
> the PXA MFP for the alternative functions of their GPIOs it makes sense
> to have a gpiolib API for this. Without one you end up having each
> driver needing to add its own API, and since the pins are just referred
> to as GPIOs in the documentation the API will have that in the name and
> look like it ought to be connected with gpiolib.
Mark,
Thanks for the comments. I do believe that API would benefit some GPIO device
drivers. I'm preparing a GPIO driver for one Intel IOH that has GPIO block
needs that API.
Thanks,
Alek
--
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