Re: [PATCH] gpio: stmpe: Add DT support for stmpe gpio

[Lee Jones]

On Fri, 23 Nov 2012, Viresh Kumar wrote:

> On 23 November 2012 17:44, Lee Jones <lee.jones@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I'm saying, just leave it where it is.
> 
> So you are suggesting this code:
> 
>         stmpe_gpio->chip.base = pdata ? pdata->gpio_base : -1;
> 
>        if (pdata)
>                stmpe_gpio->norequest_mask = pdata->norequest_mask;
>        else if (np)
>                of_property_read_u32(np, "st,norequest-mask",
> &pdata->norequest_mask);
> 
> Right? Then yes i can do it.

It would be better if you'd sent it as a diff, but yes, leave the
top line as it is and just add the norequest-mask stuff (if it's
required).

> >> >> +             if (np)
> >> >> +                     of_property_read_u32(np, "st,norequest-mask",
> >> >> +                                     &pdata->norequest_mask);
> >> >
> >> > Can you explain to me what this does?
> >>
> >> You mean pdata->norequest_mask?  It marks few gpios as unusable.
> >> Because these pads might be used by other blocks of stmpe.
> >
> > I'm not sure if that should be set with DT or not.
> >
> > Second opinion anyone?
> 
> Why i kept it in DT is because it is board dependent and there is no better
> way of communicating this from board to driver.

I can't comment, as I really don't know.

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org â Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/