From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755094Ab1BIVyU (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Feb 2011 16:54:20 -0500 Received: from wolverine01.qualcomm.com ([199.106.114.254]:39873 "EHLO wolverine01.qualcomm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751806Ab1BIVyS (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Feb 2011 16:54:18 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5400,1158,6252"; a="73823202" From: David Brown To: Dima Zavin Cc: Rohit Vaswani , Daniel Walker , Bryan Huntsman , Russell King , linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] msm: Remove arch-specific gpiomux tables In-Reply-To: (Dima Zavin's message of "Wed, 9 Feb 2011 12:59:33 -0800") References: <4D4CAB63.4050301@codeaurora.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Hashcash: 1:20:110209:dwalker@codeaurora.org::lnKagIh5cBrga7OF:0000000000000000000000000000000000000000EU7 X-Hashcash: 1:20:110209:dima@android.com::rnMFWXHhlEdJl5rA:00T57 X-Hashcash: 1:20:110209:bryanh@codeaurora.org::qkqCyHcP9O2s5Hdc:00000000000000000000000000000000000000000Mzj X-Hashcash: 1:20:110209:linux@arm.linux.org.uk::Ds2f03OXhNIyMef6:0000000000000000000000000000000000000000RuB X-Hashcash: 1:20:110209:linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org::IBCLJ2LWB+nVYYjT:0000000000000000000000000000000000Ztr X-Hashcash: 1:20:110209:rvaswani@codeaurora.org::nF+3p4n6lnfsSiJi:000000000000000000000000000000000000000+Zt X-Hashcash: 1:20:110209:linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org::+MINZMALTTWAqWiA:00000000000000000000000006we8 X-Hashcash: 1:20:110209:linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org::gFQvxorTG95XVn8g:00000000000000000000000000000000G3ca Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2011 13:54:17 -0800 Message-ID: <8yaei7gq3g6.fsf@huya.qualcomm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 09 2011, Dima Zavin wrote: > I don't like this solution of putting the magicly named array into the > board file. What if I want multiple boards to be built into the same > kernel? What if I want multiple tables in case I have different > revisions of the board? Especially since there is a push by some to be able to build everything into a single kernel. > The more correct way would be to add a function to gpiomux.c to be > able to apply a list of gpiomux configs, something like: > > int msm_gpiomux_config_table(struct msm_gpiomux_cfg *table, int num); Good idea. Although, I think a name like msm_gpiomux_add_configs() might fit better with other namings. David