[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75VcBOCinUup=DXE-CqNos4c0aEceSTVsnb6fRy06-rFheA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2024 12:58:49 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Kent Gibson <warthog618@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, brgl@...ev.pl,
linus.walleij@...aro.org, andy@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio: uapi: clarify default_values being logical
On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 12:34 PM Kent Gibson <warthog618@...il.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 05:56:07PM +0800, Kent Gibson wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 11:44:02AM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 11:28 AM Andy Shevchenko
> > > <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
..
> In response after re-reading these docs:
>
> > > Also
> > > "The values are boolean, zero for low, nonzero for high."
> > > https://docs.kernel.org/driver-api/gpio/consumer.html
>
> That one is logical and should be changed.
>
> > > And there as well
> > > "With this, all the gpiod_set_(array)_value_xxx() functions interpret
> > > the parameter "value" as "asserted" ("1") or "de-asserted" ("0")."
> > > So, should we use asserted-deasserted?
>
> We should use active/inactive rather than asserted/de-asserted. This is
> the only place that terminology is used - which is ironic as it is this
> section (_active_low_semantics) that explicitly describes the
> physical/logical mapping.
..
> > > So, can you re-read all of it for high/low asserted/deasserted,
> > > active/inactive and amend accordingly?
>
> So, from these, consumer.rst is the only file requiring any change.
> I'll submit a patch for that shortly.
Thanks for taking care of this!
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists