On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 16:35, Grant Likely wrote: > On Sat, Oct 01, 2011 at 12:39:21PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: >> 2011/9/30 Grant Likely: >> > I'm not convinced that the sysfs approach is >> > actually the right interface here (I'm certainly not a fan of the gpio >> > sysfs i/f), and I'd rather not be putting in unneeded stuff until the >> > userspace i/f is hammered out. >> >> Actually, thinking about it I cannot see what would be wrong >> with /dev/gpio0 & friends in the first place. >> >> Using sysfs as swiss army knife for custom I/O does not >> seem like it would be long-term viable so thanks for this >> observation, and I think we need /dev/gpio* put on some >> mental roadmap somewhere. > > Agreed. I don't want to be in the situation we are now with GPIO, > where every time I look at the sysfs interface I shudder.
the problem with that is it doesn't scale. if i have a device with over 150 GPIOs on the SoC itself (obviously GPIO expanders can make that much bigger), i don't want to see 150+ device nodes in /dev/. that's a pretty big waste. sysfs only allocates/frees resources when userspace actually wants to utilize a GPIO. -mike _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
