[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKohpom1RMUzSk2+GRFS-yh8bWt7J-jkF_LJP1iSdL=gLCYPsw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2012 17:55:28 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc: linus.walleij@...aro.org, grant.likely@...retlab.ca,
devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
spear-devel@...t.st.com,
Vipul Kumar Samar <vipulkumar.samar@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio: stmpe: Add DT support for stmpe gpio
On 23 November 2012 17:44, Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org> wrote:
> I'm saying, just leave it where it is.
So you are suggesting this code:
stmpe_gpio->chip.base = pdata ? pdata->gpio_base : -1;
if (pdata)
stmpe_gpio->norequest_mask = pdata->norequest_mask;
else if (np)
of_property_read_u32(np, "st,norequest-mask",
&pdata->norequest_mask);
Right? Then yes i can do it.
>> >> + if (np)
>> >> + of_property_read_u32(np, "st,norequest-mask",
>> >> + &pdata->norequest_mask);
>> >
>> > Can you explain to me what this does?
>>
>> You mean pdata->norequest_mask? It marks few gpios as unusable.
>> Because these pads might be used by other blocks of stmpe.
>
> I'm not sure if that should be set with DT or not.
>
> Second opinion anyone?
Why i kept it in DT is because it is board dependent and there is no better
way of communicating this from board to driver.
--
viresh
--
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