On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 04:49:09PM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote: > What I was not sure about was the use of having an array of unnamed > gpios as part of the consumer-side binding, where there's no logical > ordering between these entries. > In the sdhci case, there are three gpios; one to supply power to the slot; > one for card detect and one for write protect sense. > In that case, it would make a whole lot more sense to have three separate > properties, say "power-gpio", "cd-gpio" and "wp-gpio", than an opaque array of > entries without description besides what comments are used in the dts file. > That these in turn point just to gpio number <x> at controller <y> is OK with > me. Also, I can see cases where it makes sense to have more than one gpio > references in a property (i.e. busses), but only where there's either internal > ordering to them, or where ordering doesn't matter at all. I agree strongly with this - there's a very good reason why this is the existing pattern for platform data. There's other cases that are even worse than SDHCI where you can get a large number of potential outputs from a device that could be wired up, a vanishingly small number (possibly even none) of which will actually be used in a given system. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
