From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: eric@anholt.net (Eric Anholt) Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2016 20:25:23 -0700 Subject: [PATCH v2] ARM: bcm2835: Add names for the Raspberry Pi GPIO lines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <874m493tr0.fsf@eliezer.anholt.net> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Gottfried Haider writes: > Hi Eric, Linus, > > I'll hopefully find time to look at the more recent changes to the gpio > subsystem (lsgpio?!), but since this patch is up for discussion now - what > I was wondering: how does this change relate to /sys/class/gpio/gpio%d? Is > this completely orthogonal - or would this change the sysfs interface as > well? > > Regarding the proposed format using the header pin numbers: From what I've > seen in terms of existing educational materials, it seems the overwhelming > majority ends up using GPIO numbers instead of physical pin header > numbering. (e.g. [1] [2]) > Would it be too confusing to try to pick GPIO 5 from an alphabetically > sorted list like this "P11_GPIO17", "P12_GPIO18"? (I know, alphabetical > sorting is an issue here already for a different reason. But applications > might do it, I guess?) I added the pin numbers because it was a consistent response to the first version. I do think the GPIO numbers without pin numbers would be the most clear. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 800 bytes Desc: not available URL: