hi,
> Then I think it would be best to use GPIO_PIN_NONE. Makes it clear
> what is expected and avoids confusion on what should be the proper
> value.
> I hope I'm not saying non-sense, but even if I am, I guess you can see
> that I'm advocating against the magic numbers :)
What magic numbers ?
If you have a "wp_pin" on the board, you declare the struct as:
static struct mci_platform_data __initdata mci0_data = {
.slot[0] = {
.bus_width = 4,
.detect_pin = AT91_PIN_PD10,
}
}
and if you do have a "wp_pin" on your board, you declare the struct as:
static struct mci_platform_data __initdata mci0_data = {
.slot[0] = {
.bus_width = 4,
.detect_pin = AT91_PIN_PD10,
.wp_pin = AT91_PIN_PD11,
}
}
And it's more future-proof. If the next version of the
driver/peripheral has a "toggle_pin" GPIO option, you don't need to go
update all board files with a ".toggle_pin = GPIO_PIN_NONE" or
".toggle_pin = -ENODEV".
Regards,
Andrew Victor
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
