lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jun]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: gpiolib and sleeping gpios
Hi,

On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 07:40:46PM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> > > And they will trigger runtime warnings, and
> > > thus eventually get fixed.
> > \
> >   }
> >
> >   err = gpio_request(some_gpio, "some_gpio",
> > GPIOF_NO_SLEEP);
>
>
> NAK ... keep it simple. Such flags are
> clearly not necessary...
>
> I understand that some folk are bothered
> by concepts/frameworks that seem "too simple"
> and thus want to complexify them. In this
> case I am in a position to help avoid that.
> Complexity is not a virtue.
I'm against such an additional flag, too. But I still think merging
gpio_get_value and gpio_get_value_cansleep is nice.

Best regards
Uwe

--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
--
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: 2010-06-21 07:13    [W:0.159 / U:0.192 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site