Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932078Ab1F0MDy (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jun 2011 08:03:54 -0400 Received: from opensource.wolfsonmicro.com ([80.75.67.52]:51877 "EHLO opensource2.wolfsonmicro.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754659Ab1F0MDF (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jun 2011 08:03:05 -0400 Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 13:02:57 +0100 From: Mark Brown To: Linus Walleij Cc: Stijn Devriendt , Grant Likely , Linus Walleij , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Lee Jones , Alan Cox , Kyungmin Park , Kurt Van Dijck , Ben Nizette , Haojian Zhuang , Rohit Vaswani , Russell King , H Hartley Sweeten Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] RFC: gpio: driver-local pin configuration Message-ID: <20110627120256.GA19531@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <1307695731-28018-1-git-send-email-linus.walleij@stericsson.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Cookie: Big book, big bore. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 797 Lines: 17 On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 01:44:43PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > Yes. To make the driver platform neutral, it needs to for example > provide a callback in the platform data like (* set_pin_bias) or so, > and then your platform has to implement this biasing. > In this specific case that kind of stuff would likely be preferable > to have in the platform anyway, but I understand what you mean. How about device tree usage? I guess there we'd end up doing it by putting the configuration on the GPIO end of things rather than on the GPIO user side? -- 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/