Hello Alexandre, On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 11:42:42AM -0700, Alexandre Courbot wrote: > Hi Vineet, > > On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 7:05 AM, Vineet Gupta > <Vineet.Gupta1@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I'm the maintainer for arch/arc. > > > > For 3.10, we are going to have a sub-platform included which enables GPIO. > > However given that your patch is still not in a maintainer tree I'm going to apply > > the platform patch with GENERIC_GPIO and it would show up in -next as well. But > > don't be alarmed - to align with your work, Christian or you can then possibly > > apply a patch to make arch/arc/* confirm to your work - preferably via your > > tree/patchseries - OK ? > > I guess that would work, but since I assume your platforms' GPIO > implementation use gpiolib anyway wouldn't it be simpler and more > logical to directly require it? > > If you have reasons for not doing so I'm ok with doing the switch > later too, anyway that's what I had to do for all the other archs. The GPIO driver patch was proposed on lkml a few days ago and although I am not aware of any "GENERIC" methods it uses it does not compile without GENERIC_GPIO being defined (errors in of_gpio.h etc). You can review the patch at https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/4/10/385. We'd be happy to accept any guidance on how to remove GENERIC_GPIO. Also, I'm not sure the custom interface to the pin controller is a great solution and suggestions are welcome. The goal is to remove redundancy between the drivers in the definition of pin groups. Regards, Christian -- Christian Ruppert , <christian.ruppert@xxxxxxxxxx> /| Tel: +41/(0)22 816 19-42 //| 3, Chemin du Pré-Fleuri _// | bilis Systems CH-1228 Plan-les-Ouates -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
