From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tony Lindgren Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] OMAP:GPIO: Implement GPIO as a platform device Date: Wed, 5 May 2010 15:37:38 -0700 Message-ID: <20100505223738.GH29604@atomide.com> References: <877hni5akk.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org ([204.13.248.72]:49578 "EHLO mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754768Ab0EEWhn (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 May 2010 18:37:43 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <877hni5akk.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Kevin Hilman Cc: "Varadarajan, Charulatha" , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , "Nayak, Rajendra" , "paul@pwsan.com" * Kevin Hilman [100505 13:54]: > "Varadarajan, Charulatha" writes: > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Kevin Hilman [mailto:khilman@deeprootsystems.com] > > > > 2. omap_init_irq() needs to be completed before calling early_gpio_init(). > > So, if early_gpio_init() is called from omap2_init_common_hw(), we need to > > have omap_init_irq() called before omap2_init_common_hw(). But Tony > > objected this approach mentioning that board might not boot up as > > omap2_init_common_hw() has to be done asap. > > > > That's why, I had not moved the omap_gpio_init() usage from board files. > > OK... for now. I'd still like to see GPIO init consolidated as there's > no (good) reason why every board file has to init GPIOs when it's common > for all SoCs, but this doesn't necessarily have to be done in your series. > Although, if you do it for OMAP1 (as proposed below) you should do similar > for OMAP2+. Let's try to use just arch/subsys_initcall for starting the GPIO. AFAIK we don't need it earlier than that. See also my comments to the patch 5/9. Regards, Tony