From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com (Mark Brown)
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 13:02:57 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 0/2] RFC: gpio: driver-local pin configuration
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimMSChGFUSnFWFHv3nNUca_Fyawaw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1307695731-28018-1-git-send-email-linus.walleij@stericsson.com>
	<BANLkTinxptCJRETreCpUoV-nU2K4fuFcmQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTimMSChGFUSnFWFHv3nNUca_Fyawaw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110627120256.GA19531@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 01:44:43PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:

> Yes. To make the driver platform neutral, it needs to for example
> provide a callback in the platform data like (* set_pin_bias) or so,
> and then your platform has to implement this biasing.

> In this specific case that kind of stuff would likely be preferable
> to have in the platform anyway, but I understand what you mean.

How about device tree usage?  I guess there we'd end up doing it by
putting the configuration on the GPIO end of things rather than on the
GPIO user side?