From: Ed W <lists@wildgooses.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: kernel@wildgooses.com, Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>,
daniel@caiaq.de, Andres Salomon <dilinger@queued.net>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] leds: New PCEngines Alix LED driver using gpio interface
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2011 23:41:01 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D9E3D7D.3090601@wildgooses.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110407145836.3cde7699.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
On 07/04/2011 22:58, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Mar 2011 16:51:25 +0000
> kernel@wildgooses.com wrote:
>
>> From: Ed Wildgoose <kernel@wildgooses.com>
>>
>> This new driver replaces the old PCEngines Alix 2/3 LED driver with
>> a new driver that controls the LEDs through the leds-gpio driver.
>> The old driver accessed GPIOs directly, which created a conflict
>> and prevented also loading the cs5535-gio driver to read other
>> GPIOs on the Alix board. With this new driver, both are loaded
>> and therefore it's possible to access both the LEDs and onboard GPIOs
>>
>> This driver is based on leds-net5501.c
>> by: Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@towertech.it>
>> Additionally it relies on parts of the patch: 7f131cf3ed
>> by: Daniel Mack <daniel@caiaq.de> to perform detection of the Alix board
> As far as I can tell from looking at it, this driver maintains all the
> same interfaces and behaviour as the old version. Am I right?
>
Yes, this is correct. The substance of the change is simply to use the
leds-gpio interface rather than fiddling with gpio settings directly.
However, please note that Grant and Andres suggested that the driver
should instead move to "arch" and out of leds? Therefore, I created an
updated version of this patch which you can find from message id:
"1300553466-23873-1-git-send-email-kernel@wildgooses.com", ie:
http://lists.zerezo.com/linux-kernel/msg27455553.html
Additionally this updated patch has a slightly amended copyright -
several folks thought that the updated copyright statement was more
appropriate
My apologies that this updated patch was not more clearly marked as such
- Grant has taken the time to point out how I should submit patches more
clearly in the future
I would be happy to shuffle the code around further if anyone has an
opinion?
Thanks for picking this up
Ed W
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-07 22:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-03-06 16:51 [PATCH] leds: New PCEngines Alix LED driver using gpio interface kernel
2011-04-07 21:58 ` Andrew Morton
2011-04-07 22:41 ` Ed W [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-03-17 18:17 Feedback please: " Grant Likely
2011-03-18 18:12 ` kernel
2011-03-18 18:32 ` Ed W
2011-03-18 22:48 ` Grant Likely
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=4D9E3D7D.3090601@wildgooses.com \
--to=lists@wildgooses.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=daniel@caiaq.de \
--cc=dilinger@queued.net \
--cc=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
--cc=kernel@wildgooses.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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.