On Monday 02 March 2009, Tony Lindgren wrote:
>
> > I wonder if we can sort the order of GPIO MUX configurations and then
> > insert new MUXs at right position. Can I ask your opinions?
>
> Yes, I was thinking about the same. I'll combine the pending mux patches
> and merge them into a single patch for mainline tree. While doing that
> I'll sort them by gpio number. Will post the patch here for testing
> probably today.
Another thing to consider is eliminating the bugs that can
come from having the mux.c MUX_CFG_*() entries not match the
mux.h order; accidents happen. The simplest fix changes
MUX_CFG_X("string", ...)
==> {
.name = string,
...
},
to MUX_CFG_X(enum, ...)
==> [enum] = {
.name = #enum,
...
},
and adds a smidgeon of logic to verify a given mux table entry
has been initialized before using it.
- 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
