[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACRpkdYq7svYkg-zadA-vd0tG=--5pre4PBrzitqNwj6VwPYMw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 15:18:16 +0100
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To: Ray Jui <rjui@...adcom.com>
Cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Scott Branden <sbranden@...adcom.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
bcm-kernel-feedback-list <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] pinctrl: Broadcom Cygnus pinctrl device tree binding
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 7:49 AM, Ray Jui <rjui@...adcom.com> wrote:
> I dig into the pinctrl framework code a bit more and found that I can
> use pinctrl_request_gpio from the GPIO driver and implement
> gpio_request_enable in the pinctrl driver.
Yep :) ain't it nice.
> The only problem I see now is that these APIs seem to expect the use of
> global GPIO numbers?
No they don't, only if you use the deprecated pinctrl_add_gpio_range().
Instead, when you register your struct gpio_chip, use
gpiochip_add_pin_range() and this will use relative offsets
without relying on global GPIO numbers.
This latter call replaces pinctrl_add_gpio_range().
> I hope I'm not missing something here?
You're missing gpiochip_add_pin_range() ;)
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