From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933224Ab1IBJLR (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Sep 2011 05:11:17 -0400 Received: from ppsw-51.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.151]:33181 "EHLO ppsw-51.csi.cam.ac.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932813Ab1IBJLM (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Sep 2011 05:11:12 -0400 X-Cam-AntiVirus: no malware found X-Cam-SpamDetails: not scanned X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://www.cam.ac.uk/cs/email/scanner/ Message-ID: <4E609F9C.5020403@cam.ac.uk> Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2011 10:19:24 +0100 From: Jonathan Cameron User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110801 Thunderbird/5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jean Delvare CC: Stephen Warren , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Ben Dooks , Grant Likely , Arnd Bergmann , Russell King , Andrew Chew , linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, spi-devel-general@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/5] i2c: Add irq_gpio field to struct i2c_client, i2c_board_info. References: <1314914676-28397-1-git-send-email-swarren@nvidia.com> <20110902085620.4ad918c4@endymion.delvare> In-Reply-To: <20110902085620.4ad918c4@endymion.delvare> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 09/02/11 07:56, Jean Delvare wrote: > Stephen, > > Can you please fix your e-mail client / system / whatever so that your > patch series are no longer sent duplicated? > > On Thu, 1 Sep 2011 16:04:27 -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: >> Some devices use a single pin as both an IRQ and a GPIO. In that case, >> irq_gpio is the GPIO ID for that pin. Not all drivers use this feature. >> Where they do, and the use of this feature is optional, and the system >> wishes to disable this feature, this field must be explicitly set to a >> defined invalid GPIO ID, such as -1. >> >> Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren >> --- >> v3: Also add the field to i2c_board_info, and copy the field from >> i2c_board_info to i2c_client upon instantiation > > I don't get the idea. The i2c core doesn't make any use of the field, > and that field will only be used by a few drivers amongst the 420+ > i2c drivers in the tree. This looks like a waste of memory. What's wrong > with including the new field in the private platform or arch data > structure for drivers which need it? Why not make it platform data for now and 'if' it becomes way more common (probably won't) we can always propose adding as a general field at a later date.