linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] gpio-vx855: Add device tree binding

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAMLZHHR3o7OOX9-KjDgiP4h3dqvQrWanZ9z0+Yu9sqaFhme5-A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 21 Sep 2011 14:04:53 +0100
From:	Daniel Drake <dsd@...top.org>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc:	grant.likely@...retlab.ca, sameo@...ux.intel.com,
	devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	dilinger@...ued.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] gpio-vx855: Add device tree binding

On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Mark Brown
<broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 01:02:14PM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote:
>
>> +- #gpio-cells : Should be two. The first cell is the pin number and the
>> +  second cell is used to specify optional parameters:
>> +  - bit 0 specifies polarity (0 for normal, 1 for inverted)
>
> Shouldn't we just have a property for the polarity?

Can't comment on the general design, but the way it is
described/implemented in the patch is consistent with GPIO controllers
in general in the kernel. e.g. its the same as gpio_nvidia, and it is
then driven by the generic gpio/dt code rather than having to
implement extra stuff in the vx855 driver.

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/