Quoting Linus Walleij (2018-02-07 05:34:19) > Hi Stephen, > > nice work! > > On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 2:13 AM, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > For now, we plumb this into the gpiochip irq APIs so that > > GPIO/pinctrl drivers can use the gpiochip_irqchip_irq_valid() to > > test validity of GPIOs. > > But is that the right thing to do, given that we just took the > trouble to define a DT binding that is explicitly about > any GPIO, not just IRQ capable ones? > > I am worries that the *irq* infix etc on these functions > will be a bit confusing. > > Is it a lot of work to make it just generic and maybe bake it > into the gpio_chip so as to refuse already in > gpiod_request_commit() in gpiolib already? I don't think that it will be too much work to tweak the code to treat these as gpios instead of irq lines. It may end up duplicating a bit of code that the irq line stuff is already doing, but I'll take a stab at it and see how bad it comes out. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
