From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jean Delvare Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/5] i2c: Add irq_gpio field to struct i2c_client, i2c_board_info. Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2011 11:24:35 +0200 Message-ID: <20110902112435.69c9e8f7@endymion.delvare> References: <1314914676-28397-1-git-send-email-swarren@nvidia.com> <20110902085620.4ad918c4@endymion.delvare> <4E609F9C.5020403@cam.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4E609F9C.5020403-KWPb1pKIrIJaa/9Udqfwiw@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-i2c-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Jonathan Cameron Cc: Stephen Warren , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Ben Dooks , Grant Likely , Arnd Bergmann , Russell King , Andrew Chew , linux-iio-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, devel-gWbeCf7V1WCQmaza687I9mD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-tegra-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, spi-devel-general-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org Hi Jonathan, On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 10:19:24 +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > On 09/02/11 07:56, Jean Delvare wrote: > > Stephen, > > > > Can you please fix your e-mail client / system / whatever so that your > > patch series are no longer sent duplicated? > > > > On Thu, 1 Sep 2011 16:04:27 -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: > >> Some devices use a single pin as both an IRQ and a GPIO. In that case, > >> irq_gpio is the GPIO ID for that pin. Not all drivers use this feature. > >> Where they do, and the use of this feature is optional, and the system > >> wishes to disable this feature, this field must be explicitly set to a > >> defined invalid GPIO ID, such as -1. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren > >> --- > >> v3: Also add the field to i2c_board_info, and copy the field from > >> i2c_board_info to i2c_client upon instantiation > > > > I don't get the idea. The i2c core doesn't make any use of the field, > > and that field will only be used by a few drivers amongst the 420+ > > i2c drivers in the tree. This looks like a waste of memory. What's wrong > > with including the new field in the private platform or arch data > > structure for drivers which need it? > > Why not make it platform data for now and 'if' it becomes way more common > (probably won't) we can always propose adding as a general field at a later > date. Yes, this sounds like a much more reasonable approach. -- Jean Delvare From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933279Ab1IBJY4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Sep 2011 05:24:56 -0400 Received: from zone0.gcu-squad.org ([212.85.147.21]:9843 "EHLO services.gcu-squad.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933006Ab1IBJYx (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Sep 2011 05:24:53 -0400 Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2011 11:24:35 +0200 From: Jean Delvare To: Jonathan Cameron Cc: Stephen Warren , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Ben Dooks , Grant Likely , Arnd Bergmann , Russell King , Andrew Chew , linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, spi-devel-general@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/5] i2c: Add irq_gpio field to struct i2c_client, i2c_board_info. Message-ID: <20110902112435.69c9e8f7@endymion.delvare> In-Reply-To: <4E609F9C.5020403@cam.ac.uk> References: <1314914676-28397-1-git-send-email-swarren@nvidia.com> <20110902085620.4ad918c4@endymion.delvare> <4E609F9C.5020403@cam.ac.uk> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.5 (GTK+ 2.20.1; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Jonathan, On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 10:19:24 +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > On 09/02/11 07:56, Jean Delvare wrote: > > Stephen, > > > > Can you please fix your e-mail client / system / whatever so that your > > patch series are no longer sent duplicated? > > > > On Thu, 1 Sep 2011 16:04:27 -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: > >> Some devices use a single pin as both an IRQ and a GPIO. In that case, > >> irq_gpio is the GPIO ID for that pin. Not all drivers use this feature. > >> Where they do, and the use of this feature is optional, and the system > >> wishes to disable this feature, this field must be explicitly set to a > >> defined invalid GPIO ID, such as -1. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren > >> --- > >> v3: Also add the field to i2c_board_info, and copy the field from > >> i2c_board_info to i2c_client upon instantiation > > > > I don't get the idea. The i2c core doesn't make any use of the field, > > and that field will only be used by a few drivers amongst the 420+ > > i2c drivers in the tree. This looks like a waste of memory. What's wrong > > with including the new field in the private platform or arch data > > structure for drivers which need it? > > Why not make it platform data for now and 'if' it becomes way more common > (probably won't) we can always propose adding as a general field at a later > date. Yes, this sounds like a much more reasonable approach. -- Jean Delvare From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2011 11:24:35 +0200 From: Jean Delvare To: Jonathan Cameron Cc: Stephen Warren , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Ben Dooks , Grant Likely , Arnd Bergmann , Russell King , Andrew Chew , linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, spi-devel-general@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/5] i2c: Add irq_gpio field to struct i2c_client, i2c_board_info. Message-ID: <20110902112435.69c9e8f7@endymion.delvare> In-Reply-To: <4E609F9C.5020403@cam.ac.uk> References: <1314914676-28397-1-git-send-email-swarren@nvidia.com> <20110902085620.4ad918c4@endymion.delvare> <4E609F9C.5020403@cam.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII List-ID: Hi Jonathan, On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 10:19:24 +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > On 09/02/11 07:56, Jean Delvare wrote: > > Stephen, > > > > Can you please fix your e-mail client / system / whatever so that your > > patch series are no longer sent duplicated? > > > > On Thu, 1 Sep 2011 16:04:27 -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: > >> Some devices use a single pin as both an IRQ and a GPIO. In that case, > >> irq_gpio is the GPIO ID for that pin. Not all drivers use this feature. > >> Where they do, and the use of this feature is optional, and the system > >> wishes to disable this feature, this field must be explicitly set to a > >> defined invalid GPIO ID, such as -1. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren > >> --- > >> v3: Also add the field to i2c_board_info, and copy the field from > >> i2c_board_info to i2c_client upon instantiation > > > > I don't get the idea. The i2c core doesn't make any use of the field, > > and that field will only be used by a few drivers amongst the 420+ > > i2c drivers in the tree. This looks like a waste of memory. What's wrong > > with including the new field in the private platform or arch data > > structure for drivers which need it? > > Why not make it platform data for now and 'if' it becomes way more common > (probably won't) we can always propose adding as a general field at a later > date. Yes, this sounds like a much more reasonable approach. -- Jean Delvare