[U-Boot] [PATCH] dm: gpio: handle GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW flag in DT

[Eric Nelson <eric@nelint.com>]

Hi Simon,

On 04/09/2016 11:33 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
> On 4 April 2016 at 11:50, Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org> wrote:
>> On 04/03/2016 08:07 AM, Eric Nelson wrote:
>>> On 04/02/2016 08:37 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
>>>> On 04/02/2016 09:13 AM, Eric Nelson wrote:
>>>>> On 04/01/2016 10:46 PM, Peng Fan wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 01:41:04PM -0700, Eric Nelson wrote:
>>>>>>> On 03/28/2016 09:57 PM, Peng Fan wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 01:12:11PM -0700, Eric Nelson wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Device tree parsing of GPIO nodes is currently ignoring flags.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Add support for GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW by checking for the presence
>>>>>>>>> of the flag and setting the desc->flags field to the driver
>>>>>>>>> model constant GPIOD_ACTIVE_LOW.
>>>>>>>>

<snip>

>>
>> The intent of the change is good.
>>
>> I'm not sure why we need to remove gpio_find_and_xlate(); it provides an API
>> for clients so they don't need to know how to access driver functionality
>> through the ops pointer, which I think is an internal/private implementation
>> detail. Is that detail exposed to clients in other places? If so, removing
>> the wrapper seems fine. If not, I suspect it's a deliberate abstraction.
> 
> This seems a bit pedantic, but since Linux does it this way I think we
> should follow along.
> 
> Eric you still get to remove the code from all the GPIO drivers - the
> difference is just creating a common function to call when no xlate()
> method is available.
> 
> Can you please take a look at what Stephen suggests?
> 

Got it. I'm just not sure about where to start (before or after
the patch set you sent) and whether to also remove offset parsing
from gpio_find_and_xlate().