On Tue, 11 Dec 2012 13:40:51 +0200, Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 12/11/2012 01:07 AM, Grant Likely wrote:
> > On Fri, 7 Dec 2012 16:01:39 +0200, Mathias Nyman<mathias.nyman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> Add gpio support for Intel Lynxpoint chipset.
> >> Lynxpoint supports 94 gpio pins which can generate interrupts.
> >> Driver will fail requests for pins that are marked as owned by ACPI, or
> >> set in an alternate mode (non-gpio).
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Mathias Nyman<mathias.nyman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> +static void lp_gpio_set(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned gpio, int value)
> >> +{
> >> + struct lp_gpio *lg = container_of(chip, struct lp_gpio, chip);
> >> + unsigned long reg = gpio_reg(chip, gpio, LP_CONFIG1);
> >> + unsigned long flags;
> >> +
> >> + spin_lock_irqsave(&lg->lock, flags);
> >> +
> >> + if (value)
> >> + outl(inl(reg) | OUT_LVL_BIT, reg);
> >> + else
> >> + outl(inl(reg)& ~OUT_LVL_BIT, reg);
> >> +
> >> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&lg->lock, flags);
> >> +}
> >
> > A *lot* of drivers implement their own GPIO ops like this, and they all
> > end up looking the same. Please take a look at
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-generic.c and see if you can use the stock operations
> > provided there.
> >
> > g.
> >
>
> Look quite similar but turns out the only potential generic ones which
> could be used are the bgpio_set() and bgpio_get() funtions. Using them
> would require custom pin2mask, write_reg, read_reg, etc functions.
> bgpio_set_direction
You would need new write_reg and read_reg, but they'd just become part
of the library. Ah, but I see now that each GPIO has a separate
register, and not a bitmask for multiple gpio lines. Fair enough.
g.
--
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
