Re: [lm-sensors] [PATCH] hwmon: (max6650) Add support for gpiodef

[Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>]

On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 05:47:33PM +0000, Laszlo Papp wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 02:50:50PM +0000, Laszlo Papp wrote:
> >> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> wrote:
> >> > On 11/22/2013 01:23 AM, Laszlo Papp wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Just to clarify: you want to have ./gpio/gpio-max6650.c?
> >> >>
> >> > No, I never said that. I wanted you to register the gpio pins
> >> > with the gpio subsystem. I didn't ask you to write a separate
> >> > driver for it.
> >> >
> >> > Sure, strictly speaking one could write a top level mfd driver
> >> > and separate gpio and hwmon drivers, but at least in my opinion
> >> > that would be overkill. I also never suggested this; you brought
> >> > the term mfd into the discussion.
> >>
> >> Why is it an overkill to write a separate gpio driver for this, and
> >> potentially also for the gpio status register of this particular MAXIM
> >> chip?
> >>
> >> Other gpio drivers in the gpio folder are also short. This would not
> >> become long either.
> >>
> > No one prevents you from writing a separate gpio driver. I will certainly
> > not prevent you from doing it. Just don't claim that I requested it.
> > Same is true for an mfd driver; I won't prevent you from writing one.
> > But don't claim that I told you to do it.
> 
> I am not sure if you are trying to claim that with this statement a
> separate gpio driver would be acceptable, but it would require a bit
> more work, or whether that you would reject such a driver added.
> 
Please explain, for my education, what makes you believe that I would
object to or reject to anyone submitting such a driver.

Thanks,
Guenter

_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors