From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2012 11:37:20 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpiolib/arches: Centralise bolierplate asm/gpio.h Message-Id: <20120206113720.GG3070@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> MIME-Version: 1 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="PpAOPzA3dXsRhoo+" List-Id: References: <1328370879-18523-1-git-send-email-broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <20120204170632.GA3615@merkur.ravnborg.org> <20120204174115.GX889@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20120204174115.GX889@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> To: Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: Sam Ravnborg , Guan Xuetao , Ralf Baechle , Paul Mundt , Geert Uytterhoeven , Mike Frysinger , Haavard Skinnemoen , Hans-Christian Egtvedt , Grant Likely , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, uclinux-dist-devel@blackfin.uclinux.org, linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org --PpAOPzA3dXsRhoo+ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Sat, Feb 04, 2012 at 05:41:15PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > What's platform specific about asm/gpio.h is the number of GPIOs in > the system, and whether it wants to intercept the gpio_xxx() functions > to provide fast access to on-chip GPIOs. Plus the fact that it might be a completely non-standard API, and might totally override the gpiolib implementation. > What I'd suggest is moving asm-generic/gpio.h to linux/gpiolib.h, and > making asm-generic/gpio.h include that as a patch until stuff is fixed > for its new location. That should result in a proper asm-generic/gpio.h > being: > Alternatively, instead of linux/gpiolib.h, put it in linux/gpio.h instead, > but that gets more icky because of the mess of asm/gpio.h includes (which > I've been banging on for years about in ARM patches and they're _still_ > coming.) Yeah, though it is a bit neater if it's all in gpio.h and everyone is using gpiolib. Perhaps something like the warnings I added on inclusion of asm/gpio.h without linux/gpio.h would help, though I certainly wouldn't expect it to solve anything. --PpAOPzA3dXsRhoo+ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJPL7tpAAoJEBus8iNuMP3d12YQAJa6Z9EArDWj12yuaVLeGewd 3nUgd+GTaayJJo+I47NOMHevebKyErQd/y68c3YWmVXZdOi0kKZCLEupFGh1jf5B V5EphiOXY06SsHqrQXy67US1Mpf4ms2MQozBkvCEkZoF2LkwdOoZj9TCutnwquQs UD7SkQ0QQaIRehc5Y4+XM7KseFcCmyvK/mqEnRGfE9xNIln2JeStF3yifdjXeOzj +6cHi9pN5Tw25mVARelZZmx7vCA9rAoNC8tVNWet9GtOWNRiEVbBlGoNeukeMdUT iYgPCeX/IOYBivJiULQijvOMAG0FfNr3DmrAGVgeSGPRPRILX53RaqsVDXT74zme CFFuz3BhtGpE8WkjiLAPNd84I8IGsvKgQKX/KQhatUbxjf7HvfAauJ2YxFEpjNps 5UDmO5MfgsEAZ0zZXPfi67/kXjuhkPJ4PzYiwIE9MvWjLlWdEhEqmrPYVVjRwge8 nZR2P9oJRMj5k5pQ1gwe37fgabFwXe09JR1K4yKT5rpaiihiEX2HfU9I8Gm5kJGY +TQv44fnozuKj+i6SSgiDK2ljrnlZMAO8XCSemKOHtSoi67Wx40QOzw87QBMGw6H p5MDrmcw6Z1J65uXiJJTzf+FSkVc99RogMEL8nhIROIVv91TxR17/m1QPRMiVzvM WyCUwqMjTqqMAqum/gOz =ZpPo -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --PpAOPzA3dXsRhoo+--