Hi Stephen, On Wed, Aug 22 2012, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 08/22/2012 04:17 AM, Chris Ball wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Wed, Aug 22 2012, Shawn Guo wrote: >>> The following is what I have on my mind. >>> >>> broken-cd cd-gpios implication >>> ------------------------------------------- >>> no no SDHCI CD >>> no yes GPIO CD >>> yes no NO CD / Broken CD >>> yes yes Invalid >>> >>> yes: property presents >>> no: property does not present >> >> This matches Mitch's last suggestion exactly -- I think we're all agreed >> on these properties now. The only remaining question is how to handle >> the pinctrl for CD in Thomas's case. > > Sorry if this has already been mentioned, but I assume the standard > non-removable property overrides any of those, or is invalid in > combination with any of those? Yes, absolutely. I'll make sure to explain that in the new version of the document. (I think the reason it hasn't been mentioned much in this thread is that it's already part of the core bindings.) Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball <cjb@xxxxxxxxxx> <http://printf.net/> One Laptop Per Child -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 |