[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201205111322.15191.arnd@arndb.de>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 13:22:14 +0000
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Roland Stigge <stigge@...com.de>
Cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>, arm@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linus.walleij@...ricsson.com, kevin.wells@....com,
srinivas.bakki@....com, devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org,
rob.herring@...xeda.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v8] gpio: Device tree support for LPC32xx
On Friday 11 May 2012, Roland Stigge wrote:
> Right. Personally, I would be fine with either of my v8 (all banks in
> dt, referenced naturally by name) and v9 (one simple DT entry for the
> whole GPIO controller, integer index for referencing banks) patches.
>
> Consider the DT-documented mapping in the latter case:
>
> 0: GPIO P0
> 1: GPIO P1
> 2: GPIO P2
> 3: GPIO P3
> 4: GPI P3
> 5: GPO P3
>
> Not too difficult and would also be acceptable, IMO.
>
> So Arnd and Grant, please agree one of those and pick it. :-)
>
Grant is maintainer for both GPIO and DT, so his opinion is what
counts in this case.
I was merely giving the background on how we got there so he
can make an informed decision.
Arnd
--
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