On Friday 20 November 2009, Grant Likely wrote:
I don't think that's true, but I'm approaching it from the viewpoint
of managing pins; not the usage API. ie. the difference between
gpiolib (management) and the gpio api (usage).
Don't follow. The gpiolib code is unrelated to pin managment.
On Monday 23 November 2009, Grant Likely wrote:
*however* I do agree that it is the responsibility of platform code to
set up chip-internal pin muxing and routing.
Fo over 95% of systems, I'd agree -- given that platform code
includes the arch/.../mach-X/board-Y.c files. It's not realistic
to
On Monday 23 November 2009, Mark Brown wrote:
Judging from some of the other messages in the thread I suspect you're
thinking of a much closer mapping between PWM and GPIO pins - many SoCs
do have distinct PWM controllers that aren't terribly tied to a GPIO
pin.
Sometimes they can be coupled
On Monday 23 November 2009, Grant Likely wrote:
I take issue
with all the common code behind the API to make it work and to allow
GPIOs or PWMs to be registered at runtime. The overlap is the code
and behaviour used to register pins and to obtain a reference to a
pin.
