[PATCH/RFC 0/4] pinctrl: sh-pfc: Add PINMUX_SINGLE()

[PATCH/RFC 0/4] pinctrl: sh-pfc: Add PINMUX_SINGLE()

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

	Hi,

Currently single-function pins are described using the raw PINMUX_DATA()
macro.

Morimoto-san doesn't like that. He proposed to use the existing
PINMUX_IPSR_NOGP() macro instead (cfr. "[RFC] pinctrl: sh-pfc: r8a7795:
Add pinmux data for single-function pins",
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-sh/msg44823.html).
However, that macro is intended to describe a pinmux configuration
without GPIO function, which feels wrong to me.

This patch series proposes an alternative, introducing a new macro
PINMUX_SINGLE() to describe a pinmux configuration for a single-function
pin. It also converts the existing single-function pin descriptions.

Thanks for your comments!

Geert Uytterhoeven (4):
  pinctrl: sh-pfc: Add PINMUX_SINGLE()
  pinctrl: sh-pfc: r8a7790: Use PINMUX_SINGLE() instead of raw
    PINMUX_DATA()
  pinctrl: sh-pfc: r8a7791: Use PINMUX_SINGLE() instead of raw
    PINMUX_DATA()
  pinctrl: sh-pfc: r8a7794: Use PINMUX_SINGLE() instead of raw
    PINMUX_DATA()

 drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a7790.c | 18 +++++++--------
 drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a7791.c | 34 ++++++++++++++--------------
 drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a7794.c | 44 ++++++++++++++++++------------------
 drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/sh_pfc.h      |  7 ++++++
 4 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 48 deletions(-)

-- 
1.9.1

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

						Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
							    -- Linus Torvalds

[PATCH/RFC 1/4] pinctrl: sh-pfc: Add PINMUX_SINGLE()

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Add a macro to describe a pinmux configuration for a single-function
pin.

Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>
---
 drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/sh_pfc.h | 7 +++++++
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/sh_pfc.h b/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/sh_pfc.h
index 63e6cd050d0fb7d2..932fbef8bad400dd 100644
--- a/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/sh_pfc.h
+++ b/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/sh_pfc.h
@@ -277,6 +277,13 @@ struct sh_pfc_soc_info {
 	PINMUX_DATA(fn##_MARK, FN_##ms, FN_##ipsr, FN_##fn)
 
 /*
+ * Describe a pinmux configuration for a single-function pin.
+ *   - fn: Function name
+ */
+#define PINMUX_SINGLE(fn)						\
+	PINMUX_DATA(fn##_MARK, FN_##fn)
+
+/*
  * GP port style (32 ports banks)
  */
 
-- 
1.9.1

Re: [PATCH/RFC 1/4] pinctrl: sh-pfc: Add PINMUX_SINGLE()

[Laurent Pinchart]

Hi Geert,

Thank you for the patch.

On Tuesday 20 October 2015 21:26:32 Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Add a macro to describe a pinmux configuration for a single-function
> pin.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>
> ---
>  drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/sh_pfc.h | 7 +++++++
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/sh_pfc.h
> b/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/sh_pfc.h index 63e6cd050d0fb7d2..932fbef8bad400dd
> 100644
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/sh_pfc.h
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/sh_pfc.h
> @@ -277,6 +277,13 @@ struct sh_pfc_soc_info {
>  	PINMUX_DATA(fn##_MARK, FN_##ms, FN_##ipsr, FN_##fn)
> 
>  /*
> + * Describe a pinmux configuration for a single-function pin.

I would say "single-function pin with GPIO capability".

Apart from that,

Acked-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>

> + *   - fn: Function name
> + */
> +#define PINMUX_SINGLE(fn)						\
> +	PINMUX_DATA(fn##_MARK, FN_##fn)
> +
> +/*
>   * GP port style (32 ports banks)
>   */

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart

Re: [PATCH/RFC 1/4] pinctrl: sh-pfc: Add PINMUX_SINGLE()

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Laurent,

On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 1:49 AM, Laurent Pinchart
<laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday 20 October 2015 21:26:32 Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> Add a macro to describe a pinmux configuration for a single-function
>> pin.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>
>> ---
>>  drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/sh_pfc.h | 7 +++++++
>>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/sh_pfc.h
>> b/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/sh_pfc.h index 63e6cd050d0fb7d2..932fbef8bad400dd
>> 100644
>> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/sh_pfc.h
>> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/sh_pfc.h
>> @@ -277,6 +277,13 @@ struct sh_pfc_soc_info {
>>       PINMUX_DATA(fn##_MARK, FN_##ms, FN_##ipsr, FN_##fn)
>>
>>  /*
>> + * Describe a pinmux configuration for a single-function pin.
>
> I would say "single-function pin with GPIO capability".

OK, makes sense, so will update.

Note that there's usually an exception to every rule ("PENC1" on r8a7779 ;-).

> Apart from that,
>
> Acked-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>

Thanks!

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds

[PATCH/RFC 2/4] pinctrl: sh-pfc: r8a7790: Use PINMUX_SINGLE() instead of raw PINMUX_DATA()

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>
---
 drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a7790.c | 18 +++++++++---------
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a7790.c b/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a7790.c
index d9924b0d53b789c3..1acad99d646618cb 100644
--- a/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a7790.c
+++ b/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a7790.c
@@ -806,15 +806,15 @@ enum {
 static const u16 pinmux_data[] = {
 	PINMUX_DATA_GP_ALL(), /* PINMUX_DATA(GP_M_N_DATA, GP_M_N_FN...), */
 
-	PINMUX_DATA(VI1_DATA7_VI1_B7_MARK, FN_VI1_DATA7_VI1_B7),
-	PINMUX_DATA(USB0_PWEN_MARK, FN_USB0_PWEN),
-	PINMUX_DATA(USB0_OVC_VBUS_MARK, FN_USB0_OVC_VBUS),
-	PINMUX_DATA(USB2_PWEN_MARK, FN_USB2_PWEN),
-	PINMUX_DATA(USB2_OVC_MARK, FN_USB2_OVC),
-	PINMUX_DATA(AVS1_MARK, FN_AVS1),
-	PINMUX_DATA(AVS2_MARK, FN_AVS2),
-	PINMUX_DATA(DU_DOTCLKIN0_MARK, FN_DU_DOTCLKIN0),
-	PINMUX_DATA(DU_DOTCLKIN2_MARK, FN_DU_DOTCLKIN2),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(VI1_DATA7_VI1_B7),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(USB0_PWEN),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(USB0_OVC_VBUS),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(USB2_PWEN),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(USB2_OVC),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(AVS1),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(AVS2),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(DU_DOTCLKIN0),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(DU_DOTCLKIN2),
 
 	PINMUX_IPSR_DATA(IP0_2_0, D0),
 	PINMUX_IPSR_MSEL(IP0_2_0, MSIOF3_SCK_B, SEL_SOF3_1),
-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH/RFC 3/4] pinctrl: sh-pfc: r8a7791: Use PINMUX_SINGLE() instead of raw PINMUX_DATA()

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>
---
 drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a7791.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++-----------------
 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a7791.c b/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a7791.c
index 87a4f44147c1d5bc..ebadd2816b7b5dcf 100644
--- a/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a7791.c
+++ b/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a7791.c
@@ -787,23 +787,23 @@ enum {
 static const u16 pinmux_data[] = {
 	PINMUX_DATA_GP_ALL(), /* PINMUX_DATA(GP_M_N_DATA, GP_M_N_FN...), */
 
-	PINMUX_DATA(EX_CS0_N_MARK, FN_EX_CS0_N),
-	PINMUX_DATA(RD_N_MARK, FN_RD_N),
-	PINMUX_DATA(AUDIO_CLKA_MARK, FN_AUDIO_CLKA),
-	PINMUX_DATA(VI0_CLK_MARK, FN_VI0_CLK),
-	PINMUX_DATA(VI0_DATA0_VI0_B0_MARK, FN_VI0_DATA0_VI0_B0),
-	PINMUX_DATA(VI0_DATA1_VI0_B1_MARK, FN_VI0_DATA1_VI0_B1),
-	PINMUX_DATA(VI0_DATA2_VI0_B2_MARK, FN_VI0_DATA2_VI0_B2),
-	PINMUX_DATA(VI0_DATA4_VI0_B4_MARK, FN_VI0_DATA4_VI0_B4),
-	PINMUX_DATA(VI0_DATA5_VI0_B5_MARK, FN_VI0_DATA5_VI0_B5),
-	PINMUX_DATA(VI0_DATA6_VI0_B6_MARK, FN_VI0_DATA6_VI0_B6),
-	PINMUX_DATA(VI0_DATA7_VI0_B7_MARK, FN_VI0_DATA7_VI0_B7),
-	PINMUX_DATA(USB0_PWEN_MARK, FN_USB0_PWEN),
-	PINMUX_DATA(USB0_OVC_MARK, FN_USB0_OVC),
-	PINMUX_DATA(USB1_PWEN_MARK, FN_USB1_PWEN),
-	PINMUX_DATA(USB1_OVC_MARK, FN_USB1_OVC),
-	PINMUX_DATA(DU0_DOTCLKIN_MARK, FN_DU0_DOTCLKIN),
-	PINMUX_DATA(SD1_CLK_MARK, FN_SD1_CLK),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(EX_CS0_N),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(RD_N),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(AUDIO_CLKA),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(VI0_CLK),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(VI0_DATA0_VI0_B0),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(VI0_DATA1_VI0_B1),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(VI0_DATA2_VI0_B2),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(VI0_DATA4_VI0_B4),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(VI0_DATA5_VI0_B5),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(VI0_DATA6_VI0_B6),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(VI0_DATA7_VI0_B7),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(USB0_PWEN),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(USB0_OVC),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(USB1_PWEN),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(USB1_OVC),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(DU0_DOTCLKIN),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(SD1_CLK),
 
 	/* IPSR0 */
 	PINMUX_IPSR_DATA(IP0_0, D0),
-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH/RFC 4/4] pinctrl: sh-pfc: r8a7794: Use PINMUX_SINGLE() instead of raw PINMUX_DATA()

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>
---
 drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a7794.c | 44 ++++++++++++++++++------------------
 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a7794.c b/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a7794.c
index 086f6798b1294564..3324ee75e71c69b5 100644
--- a/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a7794.c
+++ b/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a7794.c
@@ -618,28 +618,28 @@ enum {
 static const u16 pinmux_data[] = {
 	PINMUX_DATA_GP_ALL(), /* PINMUX_DATA(GP_M_N_DATA, GP_M_N_FN...), */
 
-	PINMUX_DATA(A2_MARK, FN_A2),
-	PINMUX_DATA(WE0_N_MARK, FN_WE0_N),
-	PINMUX_DATA(WE1_N_MARK, FN_WE1_N),
-	PINMUX_DATA(DACK0_MARK, FN_DACK0),
-	PINMUX_DATA(USB0_PWEN_MARK, FN_USB0_PWEN),
-	PINMUX_DATA(USB0_OVC_MARK, FN_USB0_OVC),
-	PINMUX_DATA(USB1_PWEN_MARK, FN_USB1_PWEN),
-	PINMUX_DATA(USB1_OVC_MARK, FN_USB1_OVC),
-	PINMUX_DATA(SD0_CLK_MARK, FN_SD0_CLK),
-	PINMUX_DATA(SD0_CMD_MARK, FN_SD0_CMD),
-	PINMUX_DATA(SD0_DATA0_MARK, FN_SD0_DATA0),
-	PINMUX_DATA(SD0_DATA1_MARK, FN_SD0_DATA1),
-	PINMUX_DATA(SD0_DATA2_MARK, FN_SD0_DATA2),
-	PINMUX_DATA(SD0_DATA3_MARK, FN_SD0_DATA3),
-	PINMUX_DATA(SD0_CD_MARK, FN_SD0_CD),
-	PINMUX_DATA(SD0_WP_MARK, FN_SD0_WP),
-	PINMUX_DATA(SD1_CLK_MARK, FN_SD1_CLK),
-	PINMUX_DATA(SD1_CMD_MARK, FN_SD1_CMD),
-	PINMUX_DATA(SD1_DATA0_MARK, FN_SD1_DATA0),
-	PINMUX_DATA(SD1_DATA1_MARK, FN_SD1_DATA1),
-	PINMUX_DATA(SD1_DATA2_MARK, FN_SD1_DATA2),
-	PINMUX_DATA(SD1_DATA3_MARK, FN_SD1_DATA3),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(A2),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(WE0_N),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(WE1_N),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(DACK0),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(USB0_PWEN),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(USB0_OVC),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(USB1_PWEN),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(USB1_OVC),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(SD0_CLK),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(SD0_CMD),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(SD0_DATA0),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(SD0_DATA1),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(SD0_DATA2),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(SD0_DATA3),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(SD0_CD),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(SD0_WP),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(SD1_CLK),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(SD1_CMD),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(SD1_DATA0),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(SD1_DATA1),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(SD1_DATA2),
+	PINMUX_SINGLE(SD1_DATA3),
 
 	/* IPSR0 */
 	PINMUX_IPSR_DATA(IP0_0, SD1_CD),
-- 
1.9.1

Re: [PATCH/RFC 0/4] pinctrl: sh-pfc: Add PINMUX_SINGLE()

[Kuninori Morimoto]

Hi Geert

> Currently single-function pins are described using the raw PINMUX_DATA()
> macro.
> 
> Morimoto-san doesn't like that. He proposed to use the existing
> PINMUX_IPSR_NOGP() macro instead (cfr. "[RFC] pinctrl: sh-pfc: r8a7795:
> Add pinmux data for single-function pins",
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-sh/msg44823.html).
> However, that macro is intended to describe a pinmux configuration
> without GPIO function, which feels wrong to me.
> 
> This patch series proposes an alternative, introducing a new macro
> PINMUX_SINGLE() to describe a pinmux configuration for a single-function
> pin. It also converts the existing single-function pin descriptions.
> 
> Thanks for your comments!
> 
> Geert Uytterhoeven (4):
>   pinctrl: sh-pfc: Add PINMUX_SINGLE()
>   pinctrl: sh-pfc: r8a7790: Use PINMUX_SINGLE() instead of raw
>     PINMUX_DATA()
>   pinctrl: sh-pfc: r8a7791: Use PINMUX_SINGLE() instead of raw
>     PINMUX_DATA()
>   pinctrl: sh-pfc: r8a7794: Use PINMUX_SINGLE() instead of raw
>     PINMUX_DATA()
> 
>  drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a7790.c | 18 +++++++--------
>  drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a7791.c | 34 ++++++++++++++--------------
>  drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a7794.c | 44 ++++++++++++++++++------------------
>  drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/sh_pfc.h      |  7 ++++++
>  4 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 48 deletions(-)

Thanks !

For all patches

Acked-by: Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com>

Re: [PATCH/RFC 0/4] pinctrl: sh-pfc: Add PINMUX_SINGLE()

[Linus Walleij]

On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 9:26 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven
<geert+renesas@glider.be> wrote:

>         Hi,
>
> Currently single-function pins are described using the raw PINMUX_DATA()
> macro.
>
> Morimoto-san doesn't like that. He proposed to use the existing
> PINMUX_IPSR_NOGP() macro instead (cfr. "[RFC] pinctrl: sh-pfc: r8a7795:
> Add pinmux data for single-function pins",
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-sh/msg44823.html).
> However, that macro is intended to describe a pinmux configuration
> without GPIO function, which feels wrong to me.
>
> This patch series proposes an alternative, introducing a new macro
> PINMUX_SINGLE() to describe a pinmux configuration for a single-function
> pin. It also converts the existing single-function pin descriptions.

If Laurent gives his ACK you can stack these patches for your
next pull request.

Yours,
Linus Walleij

Re: [PATCH/RFC 0/4] pinctrl: sh-pfc: Add PINMUX_SINGLE()

[Laurent Pinchart]

Hi Geert,

Thank you for the patches.

On Tuesday 20 October 2015 21:26:31 Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> 	Hi,
> 
> Currently single-function pins are described using the raw PINMUX_DATA()
> macro.
> 
> Morimoto-san doesn't like that. He proposed to use the existing
> PINMUX_IPSR_NOGP() macro instead (cfr. "[RFC] pinctrl: sh-pfc: r8a7795:
> Add pinmux data for single-function pins",
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-sh/msg44823.html).
> However, that macro is intended to describe a pinmux configuration
> without GPIO function, which feels wrong to me.
> 
> This patch series proposes an alternative, introducing a new macro
> PINMUX_SINGLE() to describe a pinmux configuration for a single-function
> pin. It also converts the existing single-function pin descriptions.
> 
> Thanks for your comments!

For patches 2-4,

Acked-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>

But why haven't you included the other SoCs ?

> Geert Uytterhoeven (4):
>   pinctrl: sh-pfc: Add PINMUX_SINGLE()
>   pinctrl: sh-pfc: r8a7790: Use PINMUX_SINGLE() instead of raw
>     PINMUX_DATA()
>   pinctrl: sh-pfc: r8a7791: Use PINMUX_SINGLE() instead of raw
>     PINMUX_DATA()
>   pinctrl: sh-pfc: r8a7794: Use PINMUX_SINGLE() instead of raw
>     PINMUX_DATA()
> 
>  drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a7790.c | 18 +++++++--------
>  drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a7791.c | 34 ++++++++++++++--------------
>  drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a7794.c | 44 +++++++++++++++++----------------
>  drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/sh_pfc.h      |  7 ++++++
>  4 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 48 deletions(-)

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart

Re: [PATCH/RFC 0/4] pinctrl: sh-pfc: Add PINMUX_SINGLE()

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Laurent,

On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 1:48 AM, Laurent Pinchart
<laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday 20 October 2015 21:26:31 Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> Currently single-function pins are described using the raw PINMUX_DATA()
>> macro.
>>
>> Morimoto-san doesn't like that. He proposed to use the existing
>> PINMUX_IPSR_NOGP() macro instead (cfr. "[RFC] pinctrl: sh-pfc: r8a7795:
>> Add pinmux data for single-function pins",
>> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-sh/msg44823.html).
>> However, that macro is intended to describe a pinmux configuration
>> without GPIO function, which feels wrong to me.
>>
>> This patch series proposes an alternative, introducing a new macro
>> PINMUX_SINGLE() to describe a pinmux configuration for a single-function
>> pin. It also converts the existing single-function pin descriptions.
>>
>> Thanks for your comments!
>
> For patches 2-4,
>
> Acked-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>

Thanks!

> But why haven't you included the other SoCs ?

Because this was an RFC. Didn't want to look for more occurrences if my RFC
was rejected.

Seems like there are indeed more possible users on emev2, r8a778, r8a7779,
and sh7734.

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds