All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Chris Boot <bootc@bootc.net>
To: Ben Dooks <ben@fluff.org>
Cc: Robert Schwebel <r.schwebel@pengutronix.de>,
	kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Proposal: common kernel-wide GPIO interface
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 17:10:56 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <44CE2B90.5030905@bootc.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060730220200.GB8907@home.fluff.org>

Ben Dooks wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 30, 2006 at 03:08:11PM +0200, Robert Schwebel wrote:
>> Chris,
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 09:44:40PM +0100, Chris Boot wrote:
>>> I propose to develop a common way of registering and accessing GPIO pins on 
>>> various devices.
>> I've attached the gpio framework we have developed a while ago; it is
>> not ready for upstream, only tested on pxa and has probably several
>> other drawbacks, but may be a start for your activities. One of the
>> problems we've recently seen is that for example on PowerPCs you don't
>> have such a clear "this is gpio pin x" nomenclature, so the question
>> would be how to do the mapping here.
> 
> Right, my $0.02 worth:

[snip]

Some very interesting comments and suggestions! Thanks very much for all the
info, that's exactly the sort of stuff I needed.

> 3) The sysfs interface should be configurable, as systems
>    with lots of GPIO would end up with large numbers of
>    files and directories in sysfs.

My current idea is to divide the interfaces by GPIO device and port. I've so far
not seen a GPIO device that couldn't be divided into ports of <= 32 bits. How
wide can a 'port' actually become?

Somehow I think that a separate device/file for each pin or possibly even port 
might not be a wise idea. For example, twiddling individual pins on a GPIO when 
you connect an LCD, I2C, or SPI interface seems extremely inefficient...

> 4) you probably want to ensure pull-up resistors are off if the
>    output is being driven. 

Yes, very good idea! So far I haven't managed to fry any chips by driving a 
pulled up/down output, but it's so easy to make the mistake...

Chris

-- 
Chris Boot
bootc@bootc.net
http://www.bootc.net/



  reply	other threads:[~2006-07-31 16:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-07-28 20:44 [RFC] Proposal: common kernel-wide GPIO interface Chris Boot
2006-07-29 19:41 ` Bill Davidsen
2006-07-30 13:08 ` Robert Schwebel
2006-07-30 22:02   ` Ben Dooks
2006-07-31 16:10     ` Chris Boot [this message]
2006-07-31 20:17       ` Robert Schwebel
2006-07-31 21:23         ` Chris Boot
2006-08-01  7:40           ` Juergen Beisert
2006-08-01 15:53     ` Jim Cromie
2006-08-01 21:25   ` Jim Cromie
2006-08-02  7:28     ` Robert Schwebel
2006-08-02 17:58     ` Lennart Sorensen
2006-08-02 20:48       ` Jim Cromie
2006-08-03 13:55         ` Lennart Sorensen
2006-08-03 15:42           ` Robert Schwebel
2006-08-08 23:01         ` [RFC - patch] add a gpio-sysfs interface - was: " Jim Cromie
2006-08-09 17:12           ` Jim Cromie

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=44CE2B90.5030905@bootc.net \
    --to=bootc@bootc.net \
    --cc=ben@fluff.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=r.schwebel@pengutronix.de \
    /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.