On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 11:15:21AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:39 AM, Mika Westerberg > <mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 03:40:14PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: > >> > I forgot to mention that we want to hook up _existing_ drivers to those things, > >> > and they already use the global GPIO numbers, don't they? > >> > >> Yes they do, usually this is either passed from the platform using platform > >> data or handled by device tree lookups to individual drivers. > >> > >> So you will have to modify each such existing driver to do ACPI > >> probe akin to the DT codepath and call acpi_get_gpio() on every pin they > >> need going forward. But that is the plan I guess. > > > > Yes, that's the plan. > > > > Do you think it is OK to go with this implementation (acpi_get_gpio()) for > > now? We will try to make sure that the gpio_get() (or whatever it will be > > called that time) supports ACPI as well. > > Yes I'll be OK with it but I don't dare to merge it unless Grant > ACKs it. Is that an Ack from you? ;-) Since there is a dependency to linux-pm tree (we use the new dev->acpi_handle member) I would like this series merged via that tree. Grant, are you OK with this? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
