DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=VjShjlQkOiJWDQkAdHJpp9IgcvDUMv6rnFpN0WKqL3JMfFL8HDacn5pvJaRdDX2D2S
         QOHeQ8nLMYPSua0MYbnSvlYpK3H6VjxexfwaKBvj+A32PdN3cYgdoYhR004KaD2heEch
         LlRYvi3eAUGIoVq3v4uz4NSxbUQH4uDLBM7XQ=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1011191053040.10560@gbean-linux.qualcomm.com>
References: <1290109970-26752-1-git-send-email-gbean@codeaurora.org>
	<1290109970-26752-2-git-send-email-gbean@codeaurora.org>
	<AANLkTimTsyhjHJZggFO31C-2RswpmKWn-V4pGEiQ3+_2@mail.gmail.com>
	<alpine.DEB.2.00.1011181229380.26784@gbean-linux.qualcomm.com>
	<AANLkTi=p02P=-JQ9+FynFyM1yxrAh3utKTD2uzqhnLxK@mail.gmail.com>
	<alpine.DEB.2.00.1011181256470.29924@gbean-linux.qualcomm.com>
	<AANLkTiknYmWOmiFXGp6h2dT==aMuGs3BtXi82b6Vdq5i@mail.gmail.com>
	<alpine.DEB.2.00.1011191035210.10052@gbean-linux.qualcomm.com>
	<AANLkTiknSudbo_j+nqBqmds49CWyqXf0jpvz+DTYH-zg@mail.gmail.com>
	<alpine.DEB.2.00.1011191053040.10560@gbean-linux.qualcomm.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 11:09:06 -0800
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=VGx1xR3f7_8-cMQAmaz6PQ-t=Xubk_Jtp911V@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] msm: gpio: Add irq support to v2 gpiolib.
From: Janakiram Sistla <janakiram.sistla@gmail.com>
To: Gregory Bean <gbean@codeaurora.org>
Cc: dwalker@codeaurora.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1640
Lines: 36

On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 11:00 AM, Gregory Bean <gbean@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>>>>> Targets with the v2 block define CONFIG_MSM_V2_TLMM.
>>>>
>>>> So in that case we can name ?it as gpio-tlmm.c ??
>>>
>>> No, not and have things be any clearer.
>>>
>>> All MSM chips have a TLMM block. ?The older chips have
>>> version 1 (v1) of the TLMM block. ?The newer chips have v2.
>>
>> I think that we should differentiate the new gpio infrastructure with
>> appropriate naming that makes the diff between v1 and v2
>
> What do you suggest? ?All MSM SoCs have a TLMM block. ?The block itself
> carries no model or revision name, and is not tied specifically to any
> particular SoC, except for the fact that the second generation of this block
> happened to appear at the same time as the MSM8x60.
>
> gpio.c is already in wide use for v1 systems, and is well-establised
> in the android mainlines. ?Changing without extremely good cause would not
> go pleasantly.
>
> Since gpio.c is v1, we used gpio-v2.c for v2.
Greg, i agree your point ,but i think v2 differs from v1 with a new
features distinguished.Also there might be a intention behind going
for v2 that might resolve some hardware erratas in v1.
what if again a new generation comes then we will name it gpio-v3.c ??
>
> --
> Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
> Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.
--
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/