Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161736AbWKHWMd (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Nov 2006 17:12:33 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161743AbWKHWMc (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Nov 2006 17:12:32 -0500 Received: from smtp109.sbc.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([68.142.198.208]:28549 "HELO smtp109.sbc.mail.mud.yahoo.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1161736AbWKHWMb (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Nov 2006 17:12:31 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=pacbell.net; h=Received:Received:Date:From:To:Subject:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id; b=iEXkK74OsEi4+ZwejD1+aeLLLS+PR2Qs2H9FkpuyluOX8DaBcR+UZ7YGJDmYUXOgKQDSgvLfnAp5YSywA2AtKeSsRErB8p/LkHyNpsd4gMtKtwK5yEVrzZxtyUUFVf00vwocNRjHkumlel73fZ00hLTc/sv750dyOtFhq+3ryx0= ; Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2006 14:12:20 -0800 From: David Brownell To: hskinnemoen@atmel.com Subject: Re: [-mm patch 1/4] GPIO framework for AVR32 Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, andrew@sanpeople.com, akpm@osdl.org References: <20061107122507.6f1c6e81@cad-250-152.norway.atmel.com> <20061107122715.3022da2f@cad-250-152.norway.atmel.com> <20061107131014.535ab280.akpm@osdl.org> <20061107223741.62FA21DC801@adsl-69-226-248-13.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net> <20061108124823.308ae3b4@cad-250-152.norway.atmel.com> <20061108180059.845DE1DC95A@adsl-69-226-248-13.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net> <20061108195757.0d9e9dbc@cad-250-152.norway.atmel.com> In-Reply-To: <20061108195757.0d9e9dbc@cad-250-152.norway.atmel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20061108221220.44E6C1DC983@adsl-69-226-248-13.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 989 Lines: 23 > The request/free calls aren't really arch-specific, are they? Remember that where one platform may use numbers 32-159 for GPIOs, another might use 0-71 ... GPIO numbering has an arch-specific core, but whether a given board adds more GPIOs from an FPGA or other non-SOC chip is even more variable than "arch-specific". > I implement the actual allocation mechanism using atomic bitops. That's a fair way to implement it, sure; but if you look at e.g. how OMAP does it, the bitmap is inside a per-controller structure. When one chip has two different _types_ of GPIO controller, and multiple instances of one (plus restrictions applying to specific instances), the notion of an arch-neutral implementation there seems unworkable. - Dave - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/