On Tuesday 22 January 2008, Tony Lindgren wrote: > Yeah, I agree, changing into gpiolib is a good idea. We should also > split gpio.c into mach-omap1 and mach-omap2 parts. Splitting omap1 and omap2/3 gpio would be a good cleanup, yes. :) I'll try to make time to refresh my omap gpiolib patch against the latest gpiolib framework code (it may not even be needed). But it'd be good if someone else would do that split. There's various platform stuff to roll in. The pcf857x code worked OK last I tried; various devboards should learn to use it. The tps65010 patch should be easy to refresh, as should the debug board (H2/H3/H4/P2/...) FPGA support. That'd take a big bite out of all that ... I don't know of any holdups to keep the GPIOLIB framework out of 2.6.25-early; it's in current MM. So a 2.6.25-rc1-omap1 should have at least the core of all that work. - Dave - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
