From: swarren@wwwdotorg•org (Stephen Warren)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists•infradead.org
Subject: [PATCHv2 3/5] net: rfkill: gpio: remove gpio names
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2014 19:59:16 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53169304.9080002@wwwdotorg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACRpkdYfQoDmPX0He4J2Sn2wgQn2hHoHyPqnStLRVqrvi=M+-w@mail.gmail.com>
On 03/04/2014 07:37 PM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg•org> wrote:
>> On 03/04/2014 06:43 PM, Linus Walleij wrote:
>
>>> If I understand the situation correctly it's like ACPI does not have named
>>> GPIOs so keeping specifying this in DT GPIO bindings is counter-productive
>>> to the work of abstracting the access to GPIO handlers so that drivers
>>> need not know whether ACPI or DT is used for describing the hardware.
>>
>> For devices that already have both ACPI and DT bindings, we can't
>> pretend they can be the same; they are already potentially different. We
>> simply need to parse DT and ACPI differently, since that's the sway
>> their bindings are defined.
>>
>> For any devices that don't have both ACPI and DT bindings, I agree we
>> should certainly strive to make any new bindings aligned so we don't
>> have to deal with this for them.
>>
>> However, we can't change the past.
>
> Yeah, right, so for this very driver there are no bindings defined (yet)
> and the only device tree I can find referencing it is the Tegra20-paz00
> and it just use gpios = <>;
>
> So in this case I think this patch is the right way forward, but I admit
> I'm really uncertain in the general case.
If there are no bindings defined at all yet, then we can define both DT
and ACPI bindings to use name-based GPIOs. Index-based lookups aren't a
good way forward.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-03-05 2:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-02-25 12:22 [PATCHv2 0/5] net: rfkill: gpio: cleanup and a few new acpi ids Heikki Krogerus
2014-02-25 12:22 ` [PATCHv2 1/5] ARM: tegra: remove obsolete gpio entries Heikki Krogerus
2014-02-25 13:06 ` Marc Dietrich
2014-02-25 15:15 ` Johannes Berg
2014-02-25 23:00 ` Stephen Warren
2014-02-25 12:22 ` [PATCHv2 2/5] net: rfkill: gpio: remove unused and obsolete platform parameters Heikki Krogerus
2014-02-25 12:22 ` [PATCHv2 3/5] net: rfkill: gpio: remove gpio names Heikki Krogerus
2014-02-25 23:04 ` Stephen Warren
2014-03-05 1:43 ` Linus Walleij
2014-03-05 2:18 ` Stephen Warren
2014-03-05 2:37 ` Linus Walleij
2014-03-05 2:59 ` Stephen Warren [this message]
2014-03-07 3:41 ` Linus Walleij
2014-03-07 3:43 ` Chen-Yu Tsai
2014-03-07 4:22 ` Stephen Warren
2014-02-25 12:22 ` [PATCHv2 4/5] net: rfkill: gpio: add ACPI ID for GPS module on Lenove Miix2 Heikki Krogerus
2014-02-25 16:40 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2014-02-27 10:55 ` Heikki Krogerus
2014-02-27 11:22 ` [PATCHv3 4/5] net: rfkill: gpio: add ACPI ID for GPS module on Lenovo Miix2 Heikki Krogerus
2014-02-25 12:22 ` [PATCHv2 5/5] net: rfkill: gpio: add ACPI IDs for a Broadcom bluetooth chip Heikki Krogerus
2014-02-25 15:11 ` [PATCHv2 0/5] net: rfkill: gpio: cleanup and a few new acpi ids Johannes Berg
2014-02-25 17:59 ` Marcel Holtmann
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=53169304.9080002@wwwdotorg.org \
--to=swarren@wwwdotorg$(echo .)org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists$(echo .)infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox