On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 11:07:03AM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 11:47:04AM +0200, Markus Pargmann wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 03:37:42PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
>
> > > You also need to revert ddd5404007b8 ("gpio-sysfs: Use gpio descriptor
> > > name instead of gpiochip names array") however as this is an ABI change.
> > > Otherwise pins with a name in DT will now be exported using the gpio name
> > > rather than number as they used to be. [ The current behaviour is
> > > maintained by exporting names from chip->names for hard coded names
> > > only. ]
> >
> > Even for GPIOs from DT it is not a ABI change. The only GPIOs that have
> > a GPIO name at the moment are using the GPIO hogging mechanism. But
> > hogged GPIOs can't be exported to userspace so there is no difference
> > for these.
>
> Yes, but you're aiming at generalising the hogging mechanism so that
> such pins can be requested, and that would break the ABI.
No, hogged GPIOs can not be requested afterwards.
But you are right that GPIO names should probably not be added to
existing DTs. But that's essentially the same with the currently used
GPIO names array. Changing it would change the names in userspace as
well.
So this would be only useful for all newly created DTs.
Best Regards,
Markus
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
