[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5c672146-2a4c-6da5-85b1-5f2bb2ae5649@codeaurora.org>
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2017 16:49:43 -0500
From: Timur Tabi <timur@...eaurora.org>
To: Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>
Cc: linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Regression in next with gpiolib
On 08/30/2017 04:41 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> It seems to be that we're now calling request and free on all gpios
> before they are properly configured?
Yes, that's what my patch does. At the time, it seemed like a good idea
-- request the GPIO before touching its hardware. But it appears that
the 'request' function of some drivers also re-muxes the GPIO in order
to honor the request.
The question is whether that's correct behavior. I don't know.
--
Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm
Technologies, Inc. Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the
Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists