From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BEDF3DDDE3 for ; Fri, 31 Oct 2008 00:44:22 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: From: Kumar Gala To: Trent Piepho In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v929.2) Subject: Re: [v5] powerpc: gpio driver for mpc8349/8572/8610 and compatible Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 08:44:08 -0500 References: <1222184138-6151-1-git-send-email-jacmet@sunsite.dk> <8763najzl1.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Oct 30, 2008, at 3:58 AM, Trent Piepho wrote: > On Thu, 30 Oct 2008, Peter Korsgaard wrote: >>>>>>> "Trent" == Trent Piepho writes: >> Trent> On Tue, 23 Sep 2008, Peter Korsgaard wrote: >>>> +- compatible : "fsl,-gpio" followed by "fsl,mpc8349-gpio" >>>> for >>>> + 83xx, "fsl,mpc8572-gpio" for 85xx and "fsl,mpc8610-gpio" for >>>> 86xx. >> >> Trent> Why have the three different compatible settings when the code >> Trent> doesn't do anything different? >> >> Purely for cosmetics / ease of use - As requested by Kumar: >> >> http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2008-September/062934.html > > Though I see Scott didn't agree. Yep ;) >>>> +#define MPC8XXX_GPIO_PINS 32 >> >> Trent> 8572 has eight GPIOs. >> >> Doesn't matter - It's register interface is compatible. Most real >> world design with the other SoCs also don't have all 32 gpio pins >> available because of pin multiplexing. > > Doesn't it seem flawed that 32 gpios will show up under debugfs and > via the > sysfs interface, when it's known that there are only 8? > > Since there is an 8572 compat property, it's not like it's not > solvable. seem like a patch is order >> Trent> I wrote an MPC8572 GPIO driver back in March, and posted it >> Trent> internally at Freescale on June 2nd. But it was just >> Trent> ignored... I wonder what your secret is to get Kumar to apply >> Trent> your patches? It's too bad this work keeps getting >> Trent> duplicated. >> >> Did you try bribing? ;) No, seriously, why didn't you post it to >> linuxppc-dev, so the rest of the world would know about it? > > Well, I get totally ignored posting to an internal Freescale list, > it doesn't > seem like it will be any better posting to an external list. Trent I'm not ignoring you, its just I've got a lot of things on my plate. I expect other to comment internally to FSL and wait til something gets posted externally to pay attention. This way its hopefully been reviewed and commented by a number of people before I look at it. Also, we have patchworks externally so I have an explicit todo list that I can track. Don't feel bad. I've ignored patches from others ;) - k