From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: arnaud.patard@rtp-net.org (Arnaud Patard (Rtp)) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 18:04:09 +0100 Subject: [patch 1/1] iMX51: introduce MX51_GPIO_NR In-Reply-To: (Fabio Estevam's message of "Wed, 24 Nov 2010 14:49:21 -0200") References: <20101122224526.987309475@rtp-net.org> Message-ID: <87zksywt4l.fsf@lechat.rtp-net.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Fabio Estevam writes: Hi, > Hi Arnaud, > > 2010/11/22 Arnaud Patard : >> Currently, to define a GPIO number, we're using something like : >> >> #define EFIKAMX_PCBID0 ? ? ? ? (2*32 + 16) >> >> to define GPIO 3 16. >> >> This is not really readable and it's error prone imho (note the 3 vs 2). >> So, I'm introducing a new macro to define this in a better way. Now, the >> code sample become : >> >> #define EFIKAMX_PCBID0 ? ? ? ? MX51_GPIO_NR(3, 16) > > Can you rename the macro to MX5x_GPIO_NR instead of MX51_GPIO_NR? > > This way we can also use this macro for MX53 and MX508 when they show > up in mainline. I've been wondering about to use MX5X instead of MX51 but I kept MX51 because I didn't know how the GPIO will work on MX53. If they're compatible, you're right, the name should be MX5X_GPIO_NR and not MX51_GPIO_NR. Assuming you mail means that, I'm going to switch to MX5X_GPIO_NR. Arnaud