From: u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de (Uwe Kleine-König)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: gpiolib and sleeping gpios
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 07:27:09 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100618052709.GA6392@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4C1A980F.8080908@bluewatersys.com>
Hi Ryan,
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 09:47:59AM +1200, Ryan Mallon wrote:
> Then all drivers can just call gpio_(set/get)_value and any attempts to
> use sleeping gpios from an non-sleeping context will be caught by the
> might_sleep_if check. Is there something I am missing about this?
The downside is that you change the semantic of gpio_get_value (and
gpio_set_value I assume?). But as calling gpio_get_value with a gpio
that gpio_cansleep() is an error anyhow, so I think that's OK. The big
pro is that the API is simplified.
> I can prepare a patch which combines the non-sleeping and sleeping
> variants, but I wanted to check that I'm not missing something
> fundamental first.
I will happily look at such a patch and give my comments.
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-K?nig |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
To: Ryan Mallon <ryan@bluewatersys.com>
Cc: linux kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
David Brownell <dbrownell@users.sourceforge.net>,
gregkh@suse.de, ext-jani.1.nikula@nokia.com
Subject: Re: gpiolib and sleeping gpios
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 07:27:09 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100618052709.GA6392@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4C1A980F.8080908@bluewatersys.com>
Hi Ryan,
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 09:47:59AM +1200, Ryan Mallon wrote:
> Then all drivers can just call gpio_(set/get)_value and any attempts to
> use sleeping gpios from an non-sleeping context will be caught by the
> might_sleep_if check. Is there something I am missing about this?
The downside is that you change the semantic of gpio_get_value (and
gpio_set_value I assume?). But as calling gpio_get_value with a gpio
that gpio_cansleep() is an error anyhow, so I think that's OK. The big
pro is that the API is simplified.
> I can prepare a patch which combines the non-sleeping and sleeping
> variants, but I wanted to check that I'm not missing something
> fundamental first.
I will happily look at such a patch and give my comments.
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-06-18 5:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 64+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-06-17 21:47 gpiolib and sleeping gpios Ryan Mallon
2010-06-17 21:47 ` Ryan Mallon
2010-06-18 5:27 ` Uwe Kleine-König [this message]
2010-06-18 5:27 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2010-06-18 6:16 ` David Brownell
2010-06-18 6:16 ` David Brownell
2010-06-18 22:01 ` Ryan Mallon
2010-06-18 22:01 ` Ryan Mallon
2010-06-19 6:21 ` David Brownell
2010-06-19 6:21 ` David Brownell
2010-06-20 21:31 ` Ryan Mallon
2010-06-20 21:31 ` Ryan Mallon
2010-06-21 2:40 ` David Brownell
2010-06-21 2:40 ` David Brownell
2010-06-21 5:09 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2010-06-21 5:09 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2010-06-23 1:59 ` [RFC PATCH] Rework gpio cansleep (was Re: gpiolib and sleeping gpios) Ryan Mallon
2010-06-23 1:59 ` Ryan Mallon
2010-06-23 4:37 ` David Brownell
2010-06-23 4:37 ` David Brownell
2010-06-23 4:58 ` Eric Miao
2010-06-23 4:58 ` Eric Miao
2010-06-23 9:51 ` David Brownell
2010-06-23 9:51 ` David Brownell
2010-06-23 5:02 ` Ryan Mallon
2010-06-23 5:02 ` Ryan Mallon
2010-06-23 5:26 ` Eric Miao
2010-06-23 5:26 ` Eric Miao
2010-06-23 9:39 ` David Brownell
2010-06-23 9:39 ` David Brownell
2010-06-23 19:12 ` Ryan Mallon
2010-06-23 19:12 ` Ryan Mallon
2010-06-24 4:46 ` [RFC PATCH] Rework gpio cansleep (was Re: gpiolib and sleepinggpios) Jon Povey
2010-06-24 4:46 ` Jon Povey
2010-06-24 8:20 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2010-06-24 8:20 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2010-06-24 8:29 ` Jani Nikula
2010-06-24 8:29 ` Jani Nikula
2010-06-24 10:31 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2010-06-24 10:31 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2010-06-24 6:41 ` [RFC PATCH] Rework gpio cansleep (was Re: gpiolib and sleeping gpios) Uwe Kleine-König
2010-06-24 6:41 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2010-06-23 22:53 ` Jamie Lokier
2010-06-23 22:53 ` Jamie Lokier
2010-06-23 23:06 ` Ryan Mallon
2010-06-23 23:06 ` Ryan Mallon
2010-06-24 0:04 ` Jamie Lokier
2010-06-24 0:04 ` Jamie Lokier
2010-06-24 0:10 ` Ryan Mallon
2010-06-24 0:10 ` Ryan Mallon
2010-06-25 7:19 ` David Brownell
2010-06-25 7:19 ` David Brownell
2010-06-24 4:33 ` [RFC PATCH] Rework gpio cansleep (was Re: gpiolib and sleepinggpios) Jon Povey
2010-06-24 4:33 ` Jon Povey
2010-06-29 8:29 ` gpiolib and sleeping gpios CoffBeta
2010-06-29 8:29 ` CoffBeta
2010-06-23 11:53 ` Jani Nikula
2010-06-23 11:53 ` Jani Nikula
2010-06-23 12:40 ` David Brownell
2010-06-23 12:40 ` David Brownell
2010-06-23 13:22 ` Jani Nikula
2010-06-23 13:22 ` Jani Nikula
2010-06-23 13:39 ` David Brownell
2010-06-23 13:39 ` David Brownell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100618052709.GA6392@pengutronix.de \
--to=u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.