linux-kernel - Re: pinctrl discussions @ Linaro Connect, and also requesting GPIOs

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]

Date:	Sat, 12 Nov 2011 15:19:53 +0100
From:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:	Thomas Abraham <thomas.abraham@...aro.org>
Cc:	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-samsung-soc <linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: pinctrl discussions @ Linaro Connect, and also requesting GPIOs

On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Thomas Abraham
<thomas.abraham@...aro.org> wrote:

> Another question, not related to the above. The gpio and pinctrl
> drivers would operate on the same physical memory space (pinmux and
> gpio is just a single controller). Both gpio and pinctrl driver would
> do a ioremap of this physical address space. I remember reading that
> ioremap of the same physical memory area twice is not correct. So any
> suggestions on how to handle this.

Yes, create one single driver in a single file that presents a pinctrl *and*
a gpiolib interface. Put the driver in drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-foo.c.
That's the most natural design pattern methinks. Trying to artificially
break it apart in two driver files doesn't make sense.

Linus Walleij
--
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/