On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 4:02 PM, Guenter Roeck <li...@roeck-us.net> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 10:04:57AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
>> > Please ignore/drop this patch - a better (cleaner) fix is in the works >> > for gpiolib. >> >> This delivers though. I tested it on my also regressing iPAQ. >> > I am a bit concerned that the gpio initialization was that early on purpose, > and that by moving it we might miss some use cases. I did not find any, but > that > doesn't mean that there are none. Without knowing _why_ the initialization was > that early, I would prefer not to touch the code if it can be avoided. I think we'll go for the other patch to gpiolib. It seems much more clean and generic to support this kind of cases. Yours, Linus Walleij
