Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 20 Apr 2011 15:55:16 +0100 | From | Alan Cox <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/2] gpio: add pin biasing and drive mode to gpiolib |
| |
On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 14:38:01 +0200 Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote:
> 2011/4/20 Ben Nizette <bn@niasdigital.com>: > > On 19/04/2011, at 6:38 PM, Alan Cox wrote: > >> Leaving aside the current input/output and on/off bits I would go for > >> being able to do > >> > >> gpio_get_property(gpio, GPIO_BIAS, GPIO_BIAS_WHATEVER); > >> gpio_set_property(gpio, GPIO_BIAS, GPIO_BIAS_WHATEVER_ELSE); > > > > Yeah I'm all for that so long as the capability constants are defined by the gpio > > provider, eg <linux/gpio/mygpioexpander.h>. There's no way gpiolib should be > > keeping a big ole list of every possible config option for every gpio provider. > > OK I buy that. I will refactor this solution to some opaque call instead > and start from there. > > > Well, maybe gpiolib can know about the options (eg GPIO_BIAS) so long > > as it doesn't have to enumerate every possible value. > > I will drop that even, one parameter is better than two if one of them > is custom nevertheless. What difference does it make..
One parameter means its completely useless and we'll have to go change the API.
Without the 'operation' being a parameter of its own no driver knows how to answer the question 'is this shared operation A'
Alan -- 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/
| |