All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
diff for duplicates of <20111024073604.GA8708@ponder.secretlab.ca>

diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N1/1.txt
index f39daee..b1b8afe 100644
--- a/a/1.txt
+++ b/N1/1.txt
@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 09:26:38AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
 > > On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 16:35, Grant Likely wrote:
 > >> On Sat, Oct 01, 2011 at 12:39:21PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
 > >>> 2011/9/30 Grant Likely:
-> >>> >?I'm not convinced that the sysfs approach is
+> >>> > I'm not convinced that the sysfs approach is
 > >>> > actually the right interface here (I'm certainly not a fan of the gpio
 > >>> > sysfs i/f), and I'd rather not be putting in unneeded stuff until the
 > >>> > userspace i/f is hammered out.
@@ -16,13 +16,13 @@ On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 09:26:38AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
 > >>> observation, and I think we need /dev/gpio* put on some
 > >>> mental roadmap somewhere.
 > >>
-> >> Agreed. ?I don't want to be in the situation we are now with GPIO,
+> >> Agreed.  I don't want to be in the situation we are now with GPIO,
 > >> where every time I look at the sysfs interface I shudder.
 > >
-> > the problem with that is it doesn't scale. ?if i have a device with
+> > the problem with that is it doesn't scale.  if i have a device with
 > > over 150 GPIOs on the SoC itself (obviously GPIO expanders can make
 > > that much bigger), i don't want to see 150+ device nodes in /dev/.
-> > that's a pretty big waste. ?sysfs only allocates/frees resources when
+> > that's a pretty big waste.  sysfs only allocates/frees resources when
 > > userspace actually wants to utilize a GPIO.
 > 
 > I was more thinking along the lines of one device per GPIO controller,
diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N1/content_digest
index 5963bf7..9ccca71 100644
--- a/a/content_digest
+++ b/N1/content_digest
@@ -6,10 +6,23 @@
  "ref\020111004203520.GK2870@ponder.secretlab.ca\0"
  "ref\0CAMjpGUe9abPsdWbum2MRzOV2b5_2FDqXZC-K0KThRA6MNTr4FA@mail.gmail.com\0"
  "ref\0CACRpkdatiBathcoo2VjKs9jHJiKC5trDCJ0bePX1q6KbrYRN-g@mail.gmail.com\0"
- "From\0grant.likely@secretlab.ca (Grant Likely)\0"
- "Subject\0[PATCH] drivers: create a pin control subsystem v8\0"
+ "From\0Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>\0"
+ "Subject\0Re: [PATCH] drivers: create a pin control subsystem v8\0"
  "Date\0Mon, 24 Oct 2011 09:36:04 +0200\0"
- "To\0linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org\0"
+ "To\0Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>\0"
+ "Cc\0Mike Frysinger <vapier.adi@gmail.com>"
+  Linus Walleij <linus.ml.walleij@gmail.com>
+  Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com>
+  Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
+  Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com>
+  linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
+  Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
+  Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
+  Linaro Dev <linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org>
+  Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
+  David Brown <davidb@codeaurora.org>
+  linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
+ " Stijn Devriendt <highguy@gmail.com>\0"
  "\00:1\0"
  "b\0"
  "On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 09:26:38AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:\n"
@@ -17,7 +30,7 @@
  "> > On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 16:35, Grant Likely wrote:\n"
  "> >> On Sat, Oct 01, 2011 at 12:39:21PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:\n"
  "> >>> 2011/9/30 Grant Likely:\n"
- "> >>> >?I'm not convinced that the sysfs approach is\n"
+ "> >>> >\302\240I'm not convinced that the sysfs approach is\n"
  "> >>> > actually the right interface here (I'm certainly not a fan of the gpio\n"
  "> >>> > sysfs i/f), and I'd rather not be putting in unneeded stuff until the\n"
  "> >>> > userspace i/f is hammered out.\n"
@@ -30,13 +43,13 @@
  "> >>> observation, and I think we need /dev/gpio* put on some\n"
  "> >>> mental roadmap somewhere.\n"
  "> >>\n"
- "> >> Agreed. ?I don't want to be in the situation we are now with GPIO,\n"
+ "> >> Agreed. \302\240I don't want to be in the situation we are now with GPIO,\n"
  "> >> where every time I look at the sysfs interface I shudder.\n"
  "> >\n"
- "> > the problem with that is it doesn't scale. ?if i have a device with\n"
+ "> > the problem with that is it doesn't scale. \302\240if i have a device with\n"
  "> > over 150 GPIOs on the SoC itself (obviously GPIO expanders can make\n"
  "> > that much bigger), i don't want to see 150+ device nodes in /dev/.\n"
- "> > that's a pretty big waste. ?sysfs only allocates/frees resources when\n"
+ "> > that's a pretty big waste. \302\240sysfs only allocates/frees resources when\n"
  "> > userspace actually wants to utilize a GPIO.\n"
  "> \n"
  "> I was more thinking along the lines of one device per GPIO controller,\n"
@@ -47,4 +60,4 @@
  "\n"
  g.
 
-17f6ed75e63f60ebbda59db069f06caa43dc55c8610214b7fbde79d9475a4d68
+ae97b83cd3e1c430db1e7e0b0840983aef1485b4ed0b4eeaa0d5478b2ad466a0

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.