From: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
To: Alex Courbot <acourbot@nvidia.com>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>,
"devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org"
<devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: How about a gpio_get(device *, char *) function?
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 17:34:07 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121129173407.11A543E0A04@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2022442.P80mCjSeu2@percival>
On Wed, 28 Nov 2012 12:38:38 +0900, Alex Courbot <acourbot@nvidia.com> wrote:
> On Monday 26 November 2012 19:14:31 Grant Likely wrote:
> > I don't have any problem with a gpio_get function, but I do agree that
> > making it return an opaque handle is how it should be written with a new
> > set of accessors. The handle should probably be simply the pointer to
> > the &gpio_desc[number] which is a private table in gpiolib.c. The
> > definition of it isn't available outside of gpiolib.c
>
> That looks like a reasonable approach, but this would make the new API
> available only to systems that use GPIOlib. Shouldn't we be concerned about
> making this available to all GPIO implementations? Or is GPIOlib so widely
> used that we don't care?
I'm tempted to say non-gpiolib is not supported. However, there isn't
anything that would prevent non-gpiolib users from implementing the api
themselves, but they'd need to provide their own handle..
g.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-11-29 17:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-31 9:04 How about a gpio_get(device *, char *) function? Alex Courbot
2012-10-31 15:25 ` Stephen Warren
[not found] ` <509142F5.4010307-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org>
2012-11-01 2:48 ` Alex Courbot
2012-11-04 18:04 ` Linus Walleij
2012-11-05 7:31 ` Alex Courbot
2012-11-05 12:09 ` Linus Walleij
2012-11-26 11:25 ` Grant Likely
2012-11-05 17:35 ` Stephen Warren
2012-11-06 1:33 ` Alex Courbot
2012-11-07 21:24 ` Linus Walleij
2012-11-08 6:14 ` Alex Courbot
[not found] ` <CACRpkdYqCQc0Er1JR_eVzZPCycvKjd0Pph8Dcay0FbU3Q64D8A-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2012-11-08 6:23 ` Alex Courbot
2012-11-13 13:13 ` Linus Walleij
2012-11-07 21:28 ` Linus Walleij
2012-11-26 11:14 ` Grant Likely
2012-11-28 3:38 ` Alex Courbot
2012-11-29 17:34 ` Grant Likely [this message]
2012-12-01 18:41 ` Linus Walleij
2012-12-03 14:15 ` Grant Likely
2012-11-26 11:17 ` Grant Likely
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20121129173407.11A543E0A04@localhost \
--to=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
--cc=acourbot@nvidia.com \
--cc=devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=swarren@wwwdotorg.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).