![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
David Brownell wrote: > > - Only intended for use with "real" GPIOs that work from IRQ context; > e.g. pins on a SOC that are controlled by chip register access. > > - Doesn't handle I2C or SPI based GPIOs. I think we actually need > a different API for those "message based" GPIOs, where synchronous > get/set requires sleeping (and is thus unusable from IRQ context). > That API could be used for "real" GPIOs; the converse is not true. > > - No IORESOURCE_GPIO resource type (could be added though). > > - Can be trivially implemented today, on many systems (see partial > list above) ... no "provider" or gpiochip API necessary. > > - Provided in the form of a working patch, with sample implementation; > known to be viable on multiple architectures and platforms. > > - Includes Documentation/gpio.txt > > Comments? > If this is done, I think it's essential that a "high-level" API (one that supports message-based GPIO) is provided at the same time. The "high-level" API should be able to address the GPIOs addressed by the low-level API. What we do *not* want is a bunch of stuff using the low-level API when the high-level API would work. -hpa - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | |||||||||
| Last update: 2006-11-12 01:33 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | ||||||||||