On 09/14/2012 08:30 AM, Domenico Andreoli wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 03:48:05PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 12:11 AM, Domenico Andreoli wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 10:11:29AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
>>
I think it makes sense to more strongly
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 03:48:05PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 12:11 AM, Domenico Andreoli wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 10:11:29AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
>
> >> I think it makes sense to more strongly recommend that for GPIO muxing,
> >> the GPIO driver
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 12:11 AM, Domenico Andreoli wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 10:11:29AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> I think it makes sense to more strongly recommend that for GPIO muxing,
>> the GPIO driver always call into the pinctrl subsystem (if needed by the
>> HW) to perform
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 6:11 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 09/13/2012 01:01 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
>> +Here we first request a certain pin state and then request GPIO 14 to be
>> +used. If you're using the subsystems orthogonally like this, always get
>> +your pinctrl handle and select the
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 6:11 PM, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 09/13/2012 01:01 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
+Here we first request a certain pin state and then request GPIO 14 to be
+used. If you're using the subsystems orthogonally like this, always get
+your pinctrl handle and
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 12:11 AM, Domenico Andreoli cav...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 10:11:29AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
I think it makes sense to more strongly recommend that for GPIO muxing,
the GPIO driver always call into the pinctrl subsystem (if needed by the
HW) to
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 03:48:05PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 12:11 AM, Domenico Andreoli cav...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 10:11:29AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
I think it makes sense to more strongly recommend that for GPIO muxing,
the GPIO
On 09/14/2012 08:30 AM, Domenico Andreoli wrote:
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 03:48:05PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 12:11 AM, Domenico Andreoli cav...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 10:11:29AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
I think it makes sense to more strongly
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 10:11:29AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 09/13/2012 01:01 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > From: Linus Walleij
> >
> > The semantics of the interactions between GPIO and pinctrl may be
> > unclear, e.g. which one do you request first? This amends the
> > documentation to
On 09/13/2012 01:01 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> From: Linus Walleij
>
> The semantics of the interactions between GPIO and pinctrl may be
> unclear, e.g. which one do you request first? This amends the
> documentation to make this clear.
> +Drivers needing both pin control and GPIOs
>
From: Linus Walleij
The semantics of the interactions between GPIO and pinctrl may be
unclear, e.g. which one do you request first? This amends the
documentation to make this clear.
Reported-by: Domenico Andreoli
Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij
---
This is an attempt to write up some of the
From: Linus Walleij linus.wall...@linaro.org
The semantics of the interactions between GPIO and pinctrl may be
unclear, e.g. which one do you request first? This amends the
documentation to make this clear.
Reported-by: Domenico Andreoli cav...@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij
On 09/13/2012 01:01 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
From: Linus Walleij linus.wall...@linaro.org
The semantics of the interactions between GPIO and pinctrl may be
unclear, e.g. which one do you request first? This amends the
documentation to make this clear.
+Drivers needing both pin control and
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 10:11:29AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 09/13/2012 01:01 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
From: Linus Walleij linus.wall...@linaro.org
The semantics of the interactions between GPIO and pinctrl may be
unclear, e.g. which one do you request first? This amends the
14 matches
Mail list logo
