On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 10:50:00AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Alexandre Courbot <[email protected]> wrote:
> > But transition to gpiod is the way to ultimately fix this issue, as > > well as many others. Not to mention that renumbering GPIOs will > > certainly make a few users of the GPIO sysfs (another abomination, > > agreed) unhappy. I can only recommend switching drivers to gpiod when > > such issues are spotted. > Yeah that is another issue ... we end up in catch 22 situations like > that, renumber the GPIOs, OK, then we break the ABI. > Admittedly that "ABI" is something people break all the time, > /sys/*gpioN just isnt what it should be, not stable at all. > I'm not against renumbering GPIO if it's minor effort, but if it > start to consume hundreds of hours and regressions and what not, > that time is better spent focusing on the gpiod transition. My guess is that it's relatively little work for most platforms - with the systems I've done enough work on to notice everything is keyed off a few defines in the header file. Things tend to be worse in out of tree code but mainline's generally been pretty good.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
