From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757730AbZISAKV (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Sep 2009 20:10:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754508AbZISAKR (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Sep 2009 20:10:17 -0400 Received: from mail-iw0-f178.google.com ([209.85.223.178]:43483 "EHLO mail-iw0-f178.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754381AbZISAKQ convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Sep 2009 20:10:16 -0400 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=XE+ksIZF9R2i0RRTPJ4/h3Kh5hcMON/qocBSz9AiVfIw54mt28NDv3iicAR5x0fJdT G0c7Tqr/+aIGp2zAARpKO0BmhlCN6qQbmImkrMEs46eygCu7adz+dvhqQnVGZpj0vBFe SnyF/wqtSq41y8BINsWV/ZWkgvZubpKYrpCk0= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1249529480.16688.13.camel@ben-desktop> References: <200907311027.06370.hartleys@visionengravers.com> <200908041414.26112.david-b@pacbell.net> <1249529480.16688.13.camel@ben-desktop> Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2009 08:03:28 +0800 Message-ID: <45a44e480909181703l7b1ef8a1lf00fdd53aebfb523@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpiolib: introduce for_each_gpio_in_chip macro From: Jaya Kumar To: Ben Nizette Cc: H Hartley Sweeten , David Brownell , Linux Kernel Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 11:31 AM, Ben Nizette wrote: > On Tue, 2009-08-04 at 20:48 -0400, H Hartley Sweeten wrote: > >> For the record. The reason I sent this is I'm trying to work out an >> extension to gpiolib that adds gpio_port_* access to the API.  Most >> of the gpiolib drivers already the necessary logic since the raw I/O >> is performed on the entire 'chip'.  The API just needs the extensions >> added to request/free the port, set the direction and get/set the value. >> >> Is this a worthwhile addition? > > Plenty of people seem to think so.  Personally I haven't seen a great > use case except "'coz I can", but if you've got one I'd love to hear. Yes, you're right that there has been no major demand for it. There are (luckily?) only a moderate number of devices that are using gpio as their parallel bus interface. I've been supporting the batch-gpio patchset below out-of-the-tree because it has come in handy with a few e-paper display controllers and LCD 8080-IO that I've been developing with. > > Have you seen http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/1/25/10 ?  Donno what ended up > happening to that patchset.. > I didn't pursue it further and have maintained it out-of-tree. I felt that David had concerns about the API I implemented so it was unlikely to get merged and I didn't have the motivation to implement another. :-) Thanks, jaya ps: I'm in Portland for the festival of linux conferences this week and would be happy to work on this/discuss alternate APIs if it is of interest.