From: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com>
To: <balbi@ti.com>
Cc: Luciano Coelho <coelho@ti.com>, <tony@atomide.com>,
<linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>, <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [[PATCH v2]] OMAP: omap4-panda: add WiLink shared transport power functions
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 10:55:14 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50F7CA82.4050509@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130117093417.GH10814@arwen.pp.htv.fi>
On 01/17/2013 10:34 AM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>> I just wonder how this is going to work with DT... You are not going to have
>> the ability to use callback in this form.
>> I think the GPIO handling should be done in the driver itself rather than in
>> the board file.
>
> that can (should ?) be moved to ti-st eventually. In fact I don't know
> why it was removed in the first place, we would need Pavan to help us
> with that query.
Yes, this is a good question. I don't know what is the spacial thing platforms
need to do in the callback..
> Still, for -rc, the minimal patch had to be cooked, right ?
Sure it need to be fixed. I would try to revert the patch which caused the
issue (eccf2979 drivers/misc/ti-st: remove gpio handling).
Should fix the legacy boot, but it is going to be even bigger fun to move to
DT (and get rid of the callbacks).
I don't have anything against this patch as such. Just wanted to point out the
obvious that the comfort of callbacks are not going to be around in some cases.
--
Péter
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com>
To: balbi@ti.com
Cc: Luciano Coelho <coelho@ti.com>,
tony@atomide.com, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org,
linux@arm.linux.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [[PATCH v2]] OMAP: omap4-panda: add WiLink shared transport power functions
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 10:55:14 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50F7CA82.4050509@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130117093417.GH10814@arwen.pp.htv.fi>
On 01/17/2013 10:34 AM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>> I just wonder how this is going to work with DT... You are not going to have
>> the ability to use callback in this form.
>> I think the GPIO handling should be done in the driver itself rather than in
>> the board file.
>
> that can (should ?) be moved to ti-st eventually. In fact I don't know
> why it was removed in the first place, we would need Pavan to help us
> with that query.
Yes, this is a good question. I don't know what is the spacial thing platforms
need to do in the callback..
> Still, for -rc, the minimal patch had to be cooked, right ?
Sure it need to be fixed. I would try to revert the patch which caused the
issue (eccf2979 drivers/misc/ti-st: remove gpio handling).
Should fix the legacy boot, but it is going to be even bigger fun to move to
DT (and get rid of the callbacks).
I don't have anything against this patch as such. Just wanted to point out the
obvious that the comfort of callbacks are not going to be around in some cases.
--
Péter
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: peter.ujfalusi@ti.com (Peter Ujfalusi)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [[PATCH v2]] OMAP: omap4-panda: add WiLink shared transport power functions
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 10:55:14 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50F7CA82.4050509@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130117093417.GH10814@arwen.pp.htv.fi>
On 01/17/2013 10:34 AM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>> I just wonder how this is going to work with DT... You are not going to have
>> the ability to use callback in this form.
>> I think the GPIO handling should be done in the driver itself rather than in
>> the board file.
>
> that can (should ?) be moved to ti-st eventually. In fact I don't know
> why it was removed in the first place, we would need Pavan to help us
> with that query.
Yes, this is a good question. I don't know what is the spacial thing platforms
need to do in the callback..
> Still, for -rc, the minimal patch had to be cooked, right ?
Sure it need to be fixed. I would try to revert the patch which caused the
issue (eccf2979 drivers/misc/ti-st: remove gpio handling).
Should fix the legacy boot, but it is going to be even bigger fun to move to
DT (and get rid of the callbacks).
I don't have anything against this patch as such. Just wanted to point out the
obvious that the comfort of callbacks are not going to be around in some cases.
--
P?ter
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-01-17 9:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-16 21:45 [[PATCH v2]] OMAP: omap4-panda: add WiLink shared transport power functions Luciano Coelho
2013-01-16 21:45 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-01-16 21:45 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-01-17 9:30 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2013-01-17 9:30 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2013-01-17 9:30 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2013-01-17 9:34 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-01-17 9:34 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-01-17 9:34 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-01-17 9:55 ` Peter Ujfalusi [this message]
2013-01-17 9:55 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2013-01-17 9:55 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2013-01-17 10:05 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-01-17 10:05 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-01-17 10:05 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-01-17 10:09 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-01-17 10:09 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-01-17 10:09 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-01-17 10:35 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-01-17 10:35 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-01-17 10:35 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-01-17 10:40 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2013-01-17 10:40 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2013-01-17 10:40 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2013-01-17 17:31 ` Tony Lindgren
2013-01-17 17:31 ` Tony Lindgren
2013-01-17 17:57 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-01-17 17:57 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-01-17 17:57 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-01-17 23:16 ` Tony Lindgren
2013-01-17 23:16 ` Tony Lindgren
2013-01-18 8:58 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-01-18 8:58 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-01-18 8:58 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-01-18 17:36 ` Tony Lindgren
2013-01-18 17:36 ` Tony Lindgren
2013-01-18 17:54 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-01-18 17:54 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-01-18 17:54 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-01-18 18:05 ` Tony Lindgren
2013-01-18 18:05 ` Tony Lindgren
2013-01-18 19:08 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-01-18 19:08 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-01-18 19:08 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-01-18 19:22 ` Tony Lindgren
2013-01-18 19:22 ` Tony Lindgren
2013-01-18 10:11 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2013-01-18 10:11 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2013-01-18 10:11 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2013-01-18 17:49 ` Tony Lindgren
2013-01-18 17:49 ` Tony Lindgren
2013-01-23 8:55 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2013-01-23 8:55 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2013-01-23 8:55 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2013-01-17 9:35 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-01-17 9:35 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-01-17 9:35 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-01-17 9:59 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2013-01-17 9:59 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2013-01-17 9:59 ` Peter Ujfalusi
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=50F7CA82.4050509@ti.com \
--to=peter.ujfalusi@ti.com \
--cc=balbi@ti.com \
--cc=coelho@ti.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=tony@atomide.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.