lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Dec]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: How about a gpio_get(device *, char *) function?
From
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 6:34 PM, Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca> wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Nov 2012 12:38:38 +0900, Alex Courbot <acourbot@nvidia.com> wrote:
>> On Monday 26 November 2012 19:14:31 Grant Likely wrote:
>> > I don't have any problem with a gpio_get function, but I do agree that
>> > making it return an opaque handle is how it should be written with a new
>> > set of accessors. The handle should probably be simply the pointer to
>> > the &gpio_desc[number] which is a private table in gpiolib.c. The
>> > definition of it isn't available outside of gpiolib.c
>>
>> That looks like a reasonable approach, but this would make the new API
>> available only to systems that use GPIOlib. Shouldn't we be concerned about
>> making this available to all GPIO implementations? Or is GPIOlib so widely
>> used that we don't care?
>
> I'm tempted to say non-gpiolib is not supported. However, there isn't
> anything that would prevent non-gpiolib users from implementing the api
> themselves, but they'd need to provide their own handle..

I get the creeps when you say that ...

Now I think I have to put on my TODO to remove a few custom GPIO
implementations so it feels better. ;-)

Yours,
Linus Walleij


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-12-01 20:21    [W:0.056 / U:0.120 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site