Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 15 Dec 2009 20:47:25 +0100 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: GPIO support for HTC Dream |
| |
Hi!
> > +int gpio_to_irq(unsigned gpio) > > +{ > > + return -EINVAL; > > +} > > This should probably just be an inline function in > arch/arm/mach-msm/include/mach/gpio.h
Well, it is not performance critical in any way and it is likely to change in future. I'd leave it here.
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-msm/board-dream.h b/arch/arm/mach-msm/board-dream.h > > index 4f345a5..dbd78b9 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-msm/board-dream.h > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-msm/board-dream.h > > @@ -1,5 +1,58 @@ > > > > -#define TROUT_CPLD_BASE 0xE8100000 > > -#define TROUT_CPLD_START 0x98000000 > > -#define TROUT_CPLD_SIZE SZ_4K > > +#define MSM_SMI_BASE 0x00000000 > > +#define MSM_SMI_SIZE 0x00800000 ... > > +#define DREAM_CPLD_BASE 0xE8100000 > > +#define DREAM_CPLD_START 0x98000000 > > +#define DREAM_CPLD_SIZE SZ_4K > > + > > This header might need to be a separate patch. The only thing in it > related to the rest of this is DREAM_CPLD_BASE.
Yep.
> > +#ifndef __ASM_ARCH_MSM_GPIO_H > > +#define __ASM_ARCH_MSM_GPIO_H > > + > > +extern int gpio_to_irq(unsigned gpio); > > This should probably be an inline as mentioned above. > > For completeness you should probably also add: > > static inline int irq_to_gpio(unsigned irq) > { > return -EINVAL; > }
I'd say that would be overdoing it.
> And, nitpick, move both of them after the gpio_cansleep below.
I'll do the move.
> > +#define DREAM_GPIO_CABLE_IN1 (83) > > +#define DREAM_GPIO_CABLE_IN2 (49) > > + > > +#define DREAM_GPIO_START (128) > > Nitpick. Tab align these three with the ones below.
Ok.
> > +#define DREAM_GPIO_SDMC_CD_N (DREAM_GPIO_VIRTUAL_BASE + 0) > > +#define DREAM_GPIO_END (DREAM_GPIO_SDMC_CD_N) > > +#define DREAM_GPIO_BANK1_FIRST_INT_SOURCE (DREAM_GPIO_SDMC_CD_N) > > +#define DREAM_GPIO_BANK1_LAST_INT_SOURCE (DREAM_GPIO_SDMC_CD_N) > > + > > +#endif > > Otherwise, looks good to me. Just test it to make sure it works :-). > > Since I have no way of compiling or testing this... > > Reviewed-by: H Hartley Sweeten <hsweeten@visionengravers.com>
I believe inlining that function would be bad change. Can I still use reviewed-by tag? Pavel
-- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
| |