From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: charu@ti.com (Varadarajan, Charulatha)
Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 12:39:53 -0500
Subject: [PATCH 02/15] OMAP2PLUS: GPIO: Fix non-wakeup GPIO and rev_ids
In-Reply-To: <8762oxgz8h.fsf@ti.com>
References: <1306247094-25372-1-git-send-email-tarun.kanti@ti.com>
	<1306247094-25372-3-git-send-email-tarun.kanti@ti.com>
	<87sjs2sbvy.fsf@ti.com>
	<BANLkTik2=da94cZh23gwx1hzZQK6H_hy2Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<8762oxgz8h.fsf@ti.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikgD-EFGcJSh+EMQTwgTfBE15HkeQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

Kevin,

On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 12:15, Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com> wrote:
> "Varadarajan, Charulatha" <charu@ti.com> writes:
>
>> On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 03:04, Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com> wrote:
>>> Tarun Kanti DebBarma <tarun.kanti@ti.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> From: Charulatha V <charu@ti.com>
>>>>
>>>> Non-wakeup GPIOs are available only in OMAP2420 and OMAP3430. But
>>>> the GPIO driver initializes the non-wakeup GPIO bits for OMAP24xx
>>>> (bothe OMAP 2420 and 2430) & not for OMAP3 which is incorrect.
>>>
>>> Can you cite the documentation you're using for the OMAP3 non-wakeup
>>> GPIOs?
>>
>> I am referring to Table 25-5. GPIO Channel Description at page no 3354
>> OMAP3430 public TRM Version P.
>>
>
> Based on how I understand that, those non-wakeup GPIOs are non-wakeup
> because they're not actually mapped anywhere, and not available on
> external pins. ?Therefore, they should not need any special case
> handling for this triggering workaround.

Okay. Thanks for clarifying. I will not  do this for OMAP3. The special case
would be only for OMAP2420 against the current code which is handling
for OMAP24xx.

-V Charulatha

>
> Kevin
>
>