Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 5 Dec 2011 16:40:11 +0100 | From | Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/2] gpiolib: introduce gpio_set_pullup |
| |
On 08:51 Tue 29 Nov , Stephen Warren wrote: > Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote at Monday, November 28, 2011 7:37 PM: > > On 11:35 Sun 27 Nov , Igor Grinberg wrote: > > > On 11/25/11 17:34, Mark Brown wrote: > > > > On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 03:08:39PM +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > > > > > > > >> +/** > > > >> + * gpio_set_pullup - sets @pullup for a @gpio > > > >> + * @gpio: the gpio to set pullup > > > >> + * @pullup: pullup level > > > >> + */ > > > >> +int gpio_set_pullup(unsigned gpio, unsigned pullup) > > > > > > > > This has some overlap with the pinmux subsystem. We also need > > > > documentation of what the pullup values mean. > > yes and no > > > > as some gpio IP (only gpio i2c extender as example ) have it too > > so you can not use the pinmux for this > > Why not? > > I believe the pinctrl subsystem should be applicable to any chip, be it > the main SoC/CPU in the system, or any other chip. We don't currently > have any non-SoC drivers, but that's just because nobody has written them > yet; there's no technical reason they couldn't exist. > sorry pinmux for gpio specific management i's overkill
Best Regards, J.
| |