Hi Geert, On Sunday 05 April 2015 11:00:56 Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 2:46 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > >> + for (i = 0; i < dev->ngpios; i++) > >> + gpio_request_one(dev->gpios[i].gpio, dev->gpios[i].flags, > >> + pdev->name); > > > > Aren't GPIO numbers dynamic too in DT-based systems ? Beside, shouldn't it > > be > > Apparently not, as the old legacy number still works, and it doesn't work > without. I think we're just lucky there that the SoC main GPIO controller gets registered first and starts counting GPIOs with a zero offset. > > the responsibility of the drievr to request the GPIOs it needs ? > > As far as I understand it, on Armadillo this is used more for platform > configuration than for device configuration, as it affects multiple devices > (the comment says DBGMD/LCDC0/FSIA MUX). > > I guess I could use a "gpio-hog" subnode in DT instead, but then we're > already implementing the conversion to DT ;-) But that's the goal :-) I'd rather move GPIO and pinctrl to DT directly as we already have the infrastructure to do so. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
