Re: [PATCH v2] Documentation: gpiolib: document new interface

2013-12-04 Thread Rob Landley
On 11/24/2013 12:02:30 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote: Hi Rob, On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 8:31 AM, Rob Landley wrote: >> > Linus, I hope this can be merged during the -rc cycle of 3.13, since the >> > gpiod_ interface is going to be introduced there. It would not make much >> > sense for it to c

Re: [PATCH v2] Documentation: gpiolib: document new interface

2013-11-23 Thread Alexandre Courbot
Hi Rob, On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 8:31 AM, Rob Landley wrote: >> > Linus, I hope this can be merged during the -rc cycle of 3.13, since the >> > gpiod_ interface is going to be introduced there. It would not make much >> > sense for it to come without its documentation. >> >> You're right of course

Re: [PATCH v2] Documentation: gpiolib: document new interface

2013-11-23 Thread Rob Landley
On 11/18/2013 03:34:20 AM, Linus Walleij wrote: On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Alexandre Courbot wrote: > The first version received zero feedback, hopefully this one will get more > attention. :) Not much changes, just some more proofreading and the fixes > and improvements that came f

Re: [PATCH v2] Documentation: gpiolib: document new interface

2013-11-19 Thread Linus Walleij
On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Alex Courbot wrote: > On 11/18/2013 06:34 PM, Linus Walleij wrote: >> Don't we need an 00-INDEX file? >> (Maybe Rob can tell whether this is desirable.) > > Good idea. gpio.txt somehow fulfills that role, but it might be better if we > split it. Would you like me

Re: [PATCH v2] Documentation: gpiolib: document new interface

2013-11-18 Thread Alex Courbot
On 11/18/2013 06:34 PM, Linus Walleij wrote: On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Alexandre Courbot wrote: The first version received zero feedback, hopefully this one will get more attention. :) Not much changes, just some more proofreading and the fixes and improvements that came from it. It loo

Re: [PATCH v2] Documentation: gpiolib: document new interface

2013-11-18 Thread Linus Walleij
On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Alexandre Courbot wrote: > The first version received zero feedback, hopefully this one will get more > attention. :) Not much changes, just some more proofreading and the fixes > and improvements that came from it. It looks ok as far as I am concerned. Sorry I w