linux-kernel - Re: How about a gpio_get(device *, char *) function?

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]

Message-ID: <1503934.I4tc7K6I6s@percival>
Date:	Thu, 8 Nov 2012 15:23:22 +0900
From:	Alex Courbot <acourbot@...dia.com>
To:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
CC:	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	"devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org" 
	<devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: How about a gpio_get(device *, char *) function?

On Thursday 08 November 2012 05:24:19 Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 2:33 AM, Alex Courbot <acourbot@...dia.com> wrote:
> > How about, in a first time (and because I'd also like to get the power
> > seqs
> > moving on), a typedef from int to gpio_handle_t and a first implementation
> > of the gpio_handle_*() API that would just call the existing
> > integer-based API (apart from gpio_handle_get())? That way things will
> > not break when we switch to a real handle.
> 
> I'm afraid of typedef:ing gpio_handle_t to int because it sort of
> encourages non-handlers to be used mixed with the old integers.
> 
> I would prefer to create, e.g. in <linux/gpio/consumer.h>
> something like:
> 
> struct gpio;
> 
> struct gpio *gpio_get(struct device *dev, const char *name);
> 
> int gpio_get_value(struct gpio *g);
> 
> Nothing more! I.e. struct gpio is an opaque cookie, nothing to be known
> about it.

However these is already a struct gpio declared in linux/gpio.h. Shall the 
opaque handler be renamed something like "struct gpioh", or is your idea to 
make both APIs mutually exclusive?

Alex.

--
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/