[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <74CDBE0F657A3D45AFBB94109FB122FF04B327A628@HQMAIL01.nvidia.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2011 11:24:04 -0700
From: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>,
Jonathan Cameron <jic23@....ac.uk>
CC: Ben Dooks <ben-linux@...ff.org>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Andrew Chew <AChew@...dia.com>,
"linux-iio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>,
"devel@...verdev.osuosl.org" <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
"spi-devel-general@...ts.sourceforge.net"
<spi-devel-general@...ts.sourceforge.net>
Subject: RE: [PATCH V3 1/5] i2c: Add irq_gpio field to struct i2c_client,
i2c_board_info.
Jean Delvare wrote at Friday, September 02, 2011 3:25 AM:
> Hi Jonathan,
>
> On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 10:19:24 +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > On 09/02/11 07:56, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > > Stephen,
> > >
> > > Can you please fix your e-mail client / system / whatever so that your
> > > patch series are no longer sent duplicated?
> > >
> > > On Thu, 1 Sep 2011 16:04:27 -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
> > >> Some devices use a single pin as both an IRQ and a GPIO. In that case,
> > >> irq_gpio is the GPIO ID for that pin. Not all drivers use this feature.
> > >> Where they do, and the use of this feature is optional, and the system
> > >> wishes to disable this feature, this field must be explicitly set to a
> > >> defined invalid GPIO ID, such as -1.
> > >>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>
> > >> ---
> > >> v3: Also add the field to i2c_board_info, and copy the field from
> > >> i2c_board_info to i2c_client upon instantiation
> > >
> > > I don't get the idea. The i2c core doesn't make any use of the field,
> > > and that field will only be used by a few drivers amongst the 420+
> > > i2c drivers in the tree. This looks like a waste of memory. What's wrong
> > > with including the new field in the private platform or arch data
> > > structure for drivers which need it?
> >
> > Why not make it platform data for now and 'if' it becomes way more common
> > (probably won't) we can always propose adding as a general field at a later
> > date.
>
> Yes, this sounds like a much more reasonable approach.
BTW, if that's the direction that's decided, just take the first version
of the patchset I posted, plus Jonathan Cameron's subsequent patch to
modify ak8975 to accept GPIO ID through platform data.
--
nvpublic
--
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