linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RESEND v8] gpio: Device tree support for LPC32xx

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:	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/