From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Walleij Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] gpio: syscon: add soc specific callback to assign output value Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2014 08:19:13 +0200 Message-ID: References: <1407946582-20927-1-git-send-email-grygorii.strashko@ti.com> <1407946582-20927-2-git-send-email-grygorii.strashko@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1407946582-20927-2-git-send-email-grygorii.strashko@ti.com> Sender: linux-gpio-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Grygorii Strashko Cc: Santosh Shilimkar , Alexander Shiyan , "linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" , Rob Herring , Alexandre Courbot , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 6:16 PM, Grygorii Strashko wrote: > Some SoCs (like Keystone) may require to perform special > sequence of operations to assign output GPIO value, so default > implementation of .set() callback from gpio-syscon driver > can't be used. > > Hence, add optional, SoC specific callback to assign output > gpio value. > > Signed-off-by: Grygorii Strashko Hm :-/ I didn't realize this wasn't a quite so straight-forward a syscon GPIO driver. Now I start to think that it looks kludgy to bolt this onto the other driver and think we may need to go back to the other version which puts it as a separate driver. I guess that is what you refer to as v1? I have a hard time to make my mind up about these syscon things, sorry :-( Now I have to ask you: which way do you prefer to do it, if you can choose freely? The initial driver or augmenting the syscon driver (patch v1)? Yours, Linus Walleij