Am Dienstag, den 08.07.2014, 11:38 +0200 schrieb Linus Walleij: > On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 10:05 AM, Maxime Ripard > <maxime.ripard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 09:52:03AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > >> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 3:37 PM, Houcheng Lin <houcheng@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> > The Problem > >> > ----------- > >> > The reset signal on a hardware board is send either: > >> > - during machine initialization > >> > - during bus master's initialization > >> > >> I just thought about this a bit, since there isn't already a generic GPIO > >> reset driver, just call this drivers/reset/reset-gpio.c and make the > >> ability to deferral just a configuration detail of the GPIO reset driver. > > > > Philipp has been working on one for quite some time. See > > http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg321927.html > > > > However, it seems to progress slowly, and we don't seem to be able to > > reach a consensus here. Mostly because Maxime and I seem to have a completely different opinion and nobody else argued one way or the other. > > If you ask me, having to set a few extra properties like this just > > advocates for a regular reset driver and DT node for the reset GPIO, > > but I'm pretty sure Philipp will feel otherwise :) > > Hm haha yeah let's fight it out :-) > > This is not my subsystem so I'm getting some popcorn. Sorry about missing this earlier, I hope the popcorn is not stale. I think a reset that needs to be released before a fixed device appears on the bus, should be handled by the bus driver. The reset framework could be made to help with that, but I don't think a separate entity that scans the whole device tree itself is the right solution. regards Philipp -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
