Re: [PATCH] gpiolib: Add gpio_detect, gpio_debounce andgpio_alt_func features to GPIOLIB

[Mark Brown]

On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 01:50:25PM +0100, Ben Dooks wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 11:02:53AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:

> > Since the proposed API just passes a value through to the driver for the
> > GPIO chip it looks generic enough - each chip can define whatever set of

> Yes, however I can see some horrible problems ahead as soon as people
> try and then try and standardise the values passed through this. The

I fully expect that if anyone tries to do that all the GPIO driver
authors will turn round and tell them not to be so silly.

> GPIO API was meant to be a lightweight way of allowing drivers at
> GPIOs, now everyone seems to want to push whatever they feel like in.

This doesn't feel heavyweight to me.  I think it's better to have this
sort of widely implemented stuff there in the framework rather than
having a large proportion of GPIO drivers having to implement their own
(very similar) APIs on the side - as soon as drivers start having to do
that they start feeling unpleasant.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/