|
|
Re: [PATCH RESEND v8] gpio: Device tree support for LPC32xx |
On Friday 11 May 2012, Roland Stigge wrote: > Right. Personally, I would be fine with either of my v8 (all banks in > dt, referenced naturally by name) and v9 (one simple DT entry for the > whole GPIO controller, integer index for referencing banks) patches. > > Consider the DT-documented mapping in the latter case: > > 0: GPIO P0 > 1: GPIO P1 > 2: GPIO P2 > 3: GPIO P3 > 4: GPI P3 > 5: GPO P3 > > Not too difficult and would also be acceptable, IMO. > > So Arnd and Grant, please agree one of those and pick it. :-) > Grant is maintainer for both GPIO and DT, so his opinion is what counts in this case. I was merely giving the background on how we got there so he can make an informed decision. Arnd _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
[Linux ARM (vger)] [Linux ARM MSM] [Linux Omap] [Linux Arm] [Linux Tegra] [Fedora ARM] [eCos] [Linux Fastboot] [Gcc Help] [Git] [DCCP] [IETF Announce] [Security] [PDAs] [Linux] [Linux MIPS] [Yosemite Campsites] [Photos]
![]() |
![]() |