Hi Dave,
On Mon, Jan 01, 2007 at 12:06:19PM -0800, David Brownell wrote:
> > The concern I have with your current implementation is that I don't
> > see a way to flexibly add in support for additional gpio pins on a
> > machine by machine basis. The code does do a good job of abstracting
> > gpio
On Sunday 31 December 2006 11:11 am, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> > Based on earlier discussion, I'm sending a refresh of the generic GPIO
> > patch, with several (ARM based) implementations in separate patches:
>
> Hi Dave,
>
> I'm very interested in seeing an abstraction for gpios.
Good! I suspect
> Based on earlier discussion, I'm sending a refresh of the generic GPIO
> patch, with several (ARM based) implementations in separate patches:
Hi Dave,
I'm very interested in seeing an abstraction for gpios. Over the last
several months, I've been working on getting Linux running on my phone
-
On Wednesday 20 December 2006 3:30 pm, Håvard Skinnemoen wrote:
> On 12/20/06, David Brownell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Based on earlier discussion, I'm sending a refresh of the generic GPIO
> > patch, with several (ARM based) implementations in separate patches:
> >
> > - Core patch, doc +
On 12/20/06, David Brownell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Based on earlier discussion, I'm sending a refresh of the generic GPIO
patch, with several (ARM based) implementations in separate patches:
- Core patch, doc + +
- OMAP implementation
- AT91 implementation
- PXA implementation
- SA110
Based on earlier discussion, I'm sending a refresh of the generic GPIO
patch, with several (ARM based) implementations in separate patches:
- Core patch, doc + +
- OMAP implementation
- AT91 implementation
- PXA implementation
- SA1100 implementation
- S3C2410 implementation
I know there'
6 matches
Mail list logo