[lkml]   [2008]   [Apr]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [patch/rfc 2.6.25-git] gpio: sysfs interface

    On Tue, 2008-04-29 at 14:55 -0700, David Brownell wrote:
    > On Tuesday 29 April 2008, Ben Nizette wrote:
    > > 4) Status quo. Easy, efficient, potentially hard to discover which gpio
    > > you actually want.
    > >
    > > My vote's for 1 or 4. The first one is heavier but easier. The last
    > > one will need something like the discussed file mapping ranges to gpios.
    > My vote is for #4 with a chip listing file.
    > I don't like the hacked names ... none of the other /sys/class/*/name
    > files on any of my systems use hacked names. The entire motivation for
    > name hacking seems wrong to me, and by observation it's been rejected
    > for all other class names.

    Right, agreed.

    I guess one last option (which is made hard by chip label non-uniqueness
    but I'll throw out anyway) would be


    I guess this doesn't gain much over labelling files chipname:N (and has
    the same pitfalls) but does at least seem less hackish.

    > - Dave

     \ /
      Last update: 2008-04-30 01:31    [W:0.022 / U:7.196 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site