On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:49:47PM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote: > Russell King wrote at Thursday, August 11, 2011 1:36 PM: > > On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:05:52PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: > > > Without this, EINVAL isn't defined, and type bool isn't declared. > > > This leads to compilation failures. > > > > An alternative approach would be to convert tegra to be able to use > > the gpiolib __gpio_to_irq() for the on-SoC stuff, and eliminate > > irq_to_gpio(). > > > > Would it be possible to do that instead? > > That should work too. > > I posted a couple patches last Friday to remove irq_to_gpio: > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/8/5/343 > https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/8/5/342 > > Later in the thread, you said you would merge them into your branch to > avoid merge conflicts with the other GPIO work you were doing. I suggested it would be a good idea. Now that I've published those changes, any chance of having some updated patches in the patch system please? > For gpio_to_irq, yes, I believe we get rid of it pretty easily; we'd > just need to implement gpio-tegra.c's gpio_chip.to_irq function. Should > I cook up a patch based on top of linux-next plus the two patches above > to do that instead? Yes please, again eventually to the patch system once Grant has acked it to avoid the otherwise certain conflicts. Thanks for doing this. -- 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
