On Fri, 2008-10-24 at 11:12 -0600, Grant Likely wrote: > On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 10:54 AM, Anton Vorontsov > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 08:13:00PM +0200, Stefan Roese wrote: > >> On Thursday 23 October 2008, Wolfgang Ocker wrote: > >> > The GPIOLIB allows the specification of a base gpio number for a > >> > controller. That is not possible using OF. Instead, free gpio numbers > >> > are assigned. > >> > > >> > In order to allow static, predefined gpio numbers, a base property in > >> > the gpio controller node specifies the first gpio number. > >> > > >> > v2, v3: added/improved description of base property in doc > >> > >> These version descriptions are better placed below the "---" line. And you > >> should remove the "Re: " from the subject line. Other than this: > >> > >> Acked-by: Stefan Roese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Yeah, I don't like this patch either. GPIO numbering is a Linux > internal detail and has no bearing on the hardware description. If > you need to know what a particular gpio number is then it should be > resolved by finding the device tree node; not by trying to fix a GPIO > controller to a particular number. Okay, now I think I understand. I'll try to solve the chip select pin addressing in the spi driver differently. Thank you guys! Wolfgang _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
