From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from buildserver.ru.mvista.com (unknown [85.21.88.6]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EAD1DDE48 for ; Sat, 22 Dec 2007 08:02:48 +1100 (EST) Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 00:04:45 +0300 From: Anton Vorontsov To: Grant Likely Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] PowerPC: implement GPIO API Message-ID: <20071221210445.GA5190@localhost.localdomain> References: <20071221202824.GA4607@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf8 In-Reply-To: Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org Reply-To: avorontsov@ru.mvista.com List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 01:50:10PM -0700, Grant Likely wrote: > On 12/21/07, Anton Vorontsov wrote: > > Also, in the upcoming kernels, there will be GPIOLIB[1] addition to > > the generic GPIO API, to support off-chip GPIO expanders (like MFDs > > on I2C/LBC). But so far we support on-chip GPIOs only, with single > > controller built-in. > > > > Changes since RFC: > > - Implemented #gpio-cells handling; > > - Per-bank spinlocks removed; > > - Added a patch which implements GPIO API for CPM1; > > - Few minor fixes. > > Also need to add documentation to booting-without-of.txt. > > In general this looks like a good direction, but I do not like the > hard linking for QE and CPM gpios to the 'top level' gpio API. I > think I'd prefer this stuff to stay out of mainline until the gpiolib Well, generally I'm okay to wait for gpiolib. Though... > stuff gets merged (which should be soon IIRC). ^^^^ I doubt about that. :-) I'm looking after gpiolib development (and, well, I also partipiated in the discussion of earlier versions with former name "gpiodev") for almost a _year_. And they're still arguing about fluffy details of implementation.. :-/ As I've probably said once already: if there are plans to build single kernel with QE+CPM1+CPM2 inside tomorrow -- then of course, I'd better wait. But if these plans are distant enough, I see no reason why we can't enjoy of current API. Thanks! -- Anton Vorontsov email: cbou@mail.ru backup email: ya-cbou@yandex.ru irc://irc.freenode.net/bd2