[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110921162906.GY7781@ponder.secretlab.ca>
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 10:29:06 -0600
From: Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc: Daniel Drake <dsd@...top.org>, 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 01:50:52PM +0100, Mark Brown 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?
A flags cell in gpio specifiers (and irq specifiers for that matter) is
well established practice.
g.
--
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