Christian Mauderer commented on a discussion on cpukit/include/dev/gpio/gpio.h: https://gitlab.rtems.org/rtems/rtos/rtems/-/merge_requests/1499#note_159884 > + * > + * The pin must already be configured with a trigger other than > + * #RTEMS_GPIO_TRIGGER_NONE. > + * > + * @param fd is the descriptor for the controller's device node. > + * > + * @param pin is the logical pin whose interrupt to deliver. > + * > + * @param handler is the handler to call. > + * > + * @param arg is the argument to pass to the handler. > + * > + * @retval 0 Successful operation. > + * @retval -1 An error occurred. The errno is set to indicate the error. > + */ > +int rtems_gpio_pin_irq_enable(int fd, uint32_t pin, What about my point that we maybe should add a flag that would allow the extension of the API in the future? Basically instead of ``` int rtems_gpio_pin_irq_enable(int fd, uint32_t pin, rtems_gpio_irq_handler handler, void* arg); ``` I would suggest a ``` int rtems_gpio_pin_irq_enable(int fd, uint32_t pin, rtems_gpio_irq_flags flags, rtems_gpio_irq_handler handler, void* arg); ``` and `flag` would be always a RTEMS_GPIO_IRQ_REPLACE at the moment (without other options). That would not change anything in the current implementation but allows extending that API in the future if someone needs it. -- View it on GitLab: https://gitlab.rtems.org/rtems/rtos/rtems/-/merge_requests/1499#note_159884 You're receiving this email because of your account on gitlab.rtems.org. Unsubscribe from this thread: https://gitlab.rtems.org/-/namespace/49/sent_notifications/5-6se5rcn8om9hxv4j4k4dd0j6s-1d/unsubscribe | Manage all notifications: https://gitlab.rtems.org/-/profile/notifications | Help: https://gitlab.rtems.org/help
_______________________________________________ bugs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/bugs
