On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 12:16:30PM -0700, Grant Likely wrote: > On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 08:41:07PM +0200, Felipe Balbi wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 11:00:27PM +0530, Tarun Kanti DebBarma wrote: > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c > > > index 0b05629..6ea7390 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c > > > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c > > > @@ -28,7 +28,10 @@ > > > #include <asm/gpio.h> > > > #include <asm/mach/irq.h> > > > > > > +static LIST_HEAD(omap_gpio_list); > > > > I guess it's now too late because patch is acked and everything, but I > > think if you make the driver handle one bank alone and just instantiate > > it multiple times (omap_gpio.0, omap_gpio.1, omap_gpio.3, etc) driver > > would be faaaaaar simpler. > > Is there any shared state between the banks? On my very cursory glance it > looked like banks still have some interaction between them. If not, then > yes I agree that multiple instances would be better. A quick glance at the TRM shows that banks have separate address spaces and IRQ lines. I think it's done this way because we can handoff one (or more) bank to other cores on the SoC, so they need to be pretty independent. I could be missing something though. -- balbi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
