From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Warren Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 3/3] gpio: tegra: Hide tegra_gpio_enable/disable() Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 10:01:11 -0700 Message-ID: <4F5642D7.4090800@wwwdotorg.org> References: <1330993336-9538-1-git-send-email-swarren@nvidia.com> <1330993336-9538-3-git-send-email-swarren@nvidia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-tegra-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Linus Walleij Cc: Stephen Warren , Olof Johansson , Linus Walleij , Grant Likely , Colin Cross , Russell King , linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, linux-tegra-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Chris Ball , linux-mmc-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org On 03/06/2012 03:08 AM, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 1:22 AM, Stephen Warren wrote: > >> Recent pinctrl discussions concluded that gpiolib APIs should in fact do >> whatever is required to mux a GPIO onto pins, by calling pinctrl APIs if >> required. This change implements this for the Tegra GPIO driver, and removes >> calls to the Tegra-specific APIs from drivers and board files. ... >> This patch should probably be taken >> through the Tegra tree. Once patch 2 is in pinctrl, and considered stable, >> I can just use that as a dependency for the branch containing this Tegra >> patch. I assume that this series will go into 3.5 not 3.4, but I'm willing >> to be surprised:-) > > Should be possible if my pinctrl-tegra-for-next-diet branch is considered > stable and could be pulled into the Tegra tree for further augmenting > by this and other patches! > > But I guess you'd need to merge some stable development base > for the rest of the pinctrl stuff as well, shall I freeze the for-next > branch with tegra diet stuff merged on top now? I can promise > to just add new patches on top of that if it helps you. > > Is Olof the one to ask? For 3.4 yes Olof, but since this is probably going into 3.5, it's me! At this point, I expect picking up a stable commit from pinctrl's for-next branch would be the easiest for 3.5. Probably the same is true for 3.4 too, since "everything" is in pinctrl's for-next now. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: swarren@wwwdotorg.org (Stephen Warren) Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 10:01:11 -0700 Subject: [PATCH V2 3/3] gpio: tegra: Hide tegra_gpio_enable/disable() In-Reply-To: References: <1330993336-9538-1-git-send-email-swarren@nvidia.com> <1330993336-9538-3-git-send-email-swarren@nvidia.com> Message-ID: <4F5642D7.4090800@wwwdotorg.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 03/06/2012 03:08 AM, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 1:22 AM, Stephen Warren wrote: > >> Recent pinctrl discussions concluded that gpiolib APIs should in fact do >> whatever is required to mux a GPIO onto pins, by calling pinctrl APIs if >> required. This change implements this for the Tegra GPIO driver, and removes >> calls to the Tegra-specific APIs from drivers and board files. ... >> This patch should probably be taken >> through the Tegra tree. Once patch 2 is in pinctrl, and considered stable, >> I can just use that as a dependency for the branch containing this Tegra >> patch. I assume that this series will go into 3.5 not 3.4, but I'm willing >> to be surprised:-) > > Should be possible if my pinctrl-tegra-for-next-diet branch is considered > stable and could be pulled into the Tegra tree for further augmenting > by this and other patches! > > But I guess you'd need to merge some stable development base > for the rest of the pinctrl stuff as well, shall I freeze the for-next > branch with tegra diet stuff merged on top now? I can promise > to just add new patches on top of that if it helps you. > > Is Olof the one to ask? For 3.4 yes Olof, but since this is probably going into 3.5, it's me! At this point, I expect picking up a stable commit from pinctrl's for-next branch would be the easiest for 3.5. Probably the same is true for 3.4 too, since "everything" is in pinctrl's for-next now. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757625Ab2CFRBU (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Mar 2012 12:01:20 -0500 Received: from avon.wwwdotorg.org ([70.85.31.133]:41459 "EHLO avon.wwwdotorg.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757365Ab2CFRBQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Mar 2012 12:01:16 -0500 Message-ID: <4F5642D7.4090800@wwwdotorg.org> Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 10:01:11 -0700 From: Stephen Warren User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.23) Gecko/20110921 Thunderbird/3.1.15 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linus Walleij CC: Stephen Warren , Olof Johansson , Linus Walleij , Grant Likely , Colin Cross , Russell King , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org, Chris Ball , linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 3/3] gpio: tegra: Hide tegra_gpio_enable/disable() References: <1330993336-9538-1-git-send-email-swarren@nvidia.com> <1330993336-9538-3-git-send-email-swarren@nvidia.com> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 03/06/2012 03:08 AM, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 1:22 AM, Stephen Warren wrote: > >> Recent pinctrl discussions concluded that gpiolib APIs should in fact do >> whatever is required to mux a GPIO onto pins, by calling pinctrl APIs if >> required. This change implements this for the Tegra GPIO driver, and removes >> calls to the Tegra-specific APIs from drivers and board files. ... >> This patch should probably be taken >> through the Tegra tree. Once patch 2 is in pinctrl, and considered stable, >> I can just use that as a dependency for the branch containing this Tegra >> patch. I assume that this series will go into 3.5 not 3.4, but I'm willing >> to be surprised:-) > > Should be possible if my pinctrl-tegra-for-next-diet branch is considered > stable and could be pulled into the Tegra tree for further augmenting > by this and other patches! > > But I guess you'd need to merge some stable development base > for the rest of the pinctrl stuff as well, shall I freeze the for-next > branch with tegra diet stuff merged on top now? I can promise > to just add new patches on top of that if it helps you. > > Is Olof the one to ask? For 3.4 yes Olof, but since this is probably going into 3.5, it's me! At this point, I expect picking up a stable commit from pinctrl's for-next branch would be the easiest for 3.5. Probably the same is true for 3.4 too, since "everything" is in pinctrl's for-next now.