On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 01:08:57PM +0200, Petr Tesařík wrote: > On Thu, 23 Jul 2015 14:59:32 -0700 > "John D. Blair" <johnb-VAraepgqNCc/CDIEhCN/twC/G2K4zDHf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Thu, 2015-07-23 at 18:00 +0200, Johan Hovold wrote: > > > The short answer is that we do not want custom driver ioctls. Any gpio > > > implementation needs to based on gpiolib, which provides a > > > standardised > > > interface. > > > > > I understand. > > > > We will evaluate and decide if the work is worth it for us to do. > > FWIW I'm planning to do this work. I've just started cleaning up the > cp210x sources, but my goal is to get gpio support (and not using > IOCTLs). That sounds great. > One of the challenges is that the CP210x device is in fact two logical > devices (the serial port and the GPIO), so theoretically, there should > be two drivers and a common module to handle resource conflicts, but I > believe this would be overkill. Indeed, you should just hang the gpio device directly off the usb-serial device (the interface, not the port). You can keep the implementation in its own file if it makes sense (e.g. to avoid ifdefs), but no need to try to force it to live under drivers/gpio. > I'll see how it goes with the upstream maintainers. ;-) We've pretty much agreed on the above by now. Thanks, Johan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
