[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACRpkdaNqjHenMyPbEEFpE+5mvWqHsMNO3T3H=NM4X7TxU-sGw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 11:15:21 +0100
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lenb@...nel.org,
rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com, broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com,
grant.likely@...retlab.ca, khali@...ux-fr.org, ben-linux@...ff.org,
w.sang@...gutronix.de, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] gpio / ACPI: add ACPI support
On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:39 AM, Mika Westerberg
<mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 03:40:14PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
>> > I forgot to mention that we want to hook up _existing_ drivers to those things,
>> > and they already use the global GPIO numbers, don't they?
>>
>> Yes they do, usually this is either passed from the platform using platform
>> data or handled by device tree lookups to individual drivers.
>>
>> So you will have to modify each such existing driver to do ACPI
>> probe akin to the DT codepath and call acpi_get_gpio() on every pin they
>> need going forward. But that is the plan I guess.
>
> Yes, that's the plan.
>
> Do you think it is OK to go with this implementation (acpi_get_gpio()) for
> now? We will try to make sure that the gpio_get() (or whatever it will be
> called that time) supports ACPI as well.
Yes I'll be OK with it but I don't dare to merge it unless Grant
ACKs it.
Yours,
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists