From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Jeffery Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 10:30:36 +1030 Subject: [RFC PATCH 1/5] gpio: gpiolib: Add core support for maintaining GPIO values on reset In-Reply-To: <20171025081141.uczvbfstmt3jcisw@localhost.localdomain> References: <20171020033727.21557-1-andrew@aj.id.au> <20171020033727.21557-2-andrew@aj.id.au> <1508488347.24322.51.camel@aj.id.au> <20171025081141.uczvbfstmt3jcisw@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1508976036.13477.3.camel@aj.id.au> List-Id: To: linux-aspeed@lists.ozlabs.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 2017-10-25 at 09:11 +0100, Charles Keepax wrote: > On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 07:02:27PM +1030, Andrew Jeffery wrote: > > On Fri, 2017-10-20 at 09:43 +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 9:17 AM, Linus Walleij wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 5:37 AM, Andrew Jeffery wrote: > > > > > GPIO state reset tolerance is implemented in gpiolib through the > > > > > addition of a new pinconf parameter. With that, some renaming of helpers > > > > > is done to clarify the scope of the already existing > > > > > gpiochip_line_is_persistent(), as it's now ambiguous as to whether that > > > > > means on suspend, reset or both. > > > > > > > > Isn't it most reasonable to say persistance covers both cases, reset > > > > and/or sleep? This seems a bit like overdefined. > > Seems reasonable to me to just expand the existing stuff to cover > reset as well, I don't think that should cause any issues for the > Arizona stuff. Great. I addressed this in the non-RFC series. Thanks for the feedback. Andrew -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 801 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: