On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 01:24:42PM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> On Thursday 16 October 2008, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> > +/*
> > + * Platforms can define their own __dev_ versions to glue gpio_chips with
> > the
> > + * architecture-specific code.
> > + */
> > +#ifndef __dev_gpiochip_add
> > +#define __dev_gpiochip_add __dev_gpiochip_add
> > +static inline int __dev_gpiochip_add(struct device *dev,
> > + struct gpio_chip *chip)
> > +{
> > + chip->dev = dev;
> > + return gpiochip_add(chip);
> > +}
> > +#endif /* __dev_gpiochip_add */
>
> This is pretty ugly, especially the implication that *EVERY* gpio_chip
> provider needs modification to use these calls.
Anyway most of them need some modifications to work with OF...
> Surely it would be a lot simpler to just add platform-specific hooks
> to gpiochip_{add,remove}(), [...]
We have printk and dev_printk. kzalloc and devm_kzalloc (though I
aware that devm_ are different than just dev_). So I thought that
dev_gpiochip_* would be logical order of things...
If you don't like it, I can readily implement hooks for
gpiochip_{add,remove}().
Thanks for the comments,
--
Anton Vorontsov
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
irc://irc.freenode.net/bd2
_______________________________________________
i2c mailing list
i2c@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/i2c
