On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 9:53 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Thursday, June 02, 2011 17:30:09 Tom Warren wrote:
>> Let me double-check. IIRC, one (cmd_gpio) didn't apply since it was
>> from another SoC
>
> no, it isnt. it's using the generic GPIO API as defined by Linux and
> implemented by many p
On Thursday, June 02, 2011 17:55:55 Tom Warren wrote:
> Actually, if you do a kompare between cmd_gpio.c and tegra2_gpio.c,
> there's virtually no 'duplicated' code, just 2 different
> implementations of do_gpio, with different args and parsing of params,
> etc. I use info, port, input and output,
On Thursday, June 02, 2011 17:30:09 Tom Warren wrote:
> Let me double-check. IIRC, one (cmd_gpio) didn't apply since it was
> from another SoC
no, it isnt. it's using the generic GPIO API as defined by Linux and
implemented by many ports in u-boot. any new GPIO provider in u-boot should
probab
Dear Tom Warren,
In message you wrote:
>
> >> Let me double-check. IIRC, one (cmd_gpio) didn't apply since it was
> >> from another SoC and didn't have the commands we use on Tegra, and the
> >> other (where the driver should go) ended with Mike saying "i'm not
> >> sure sweating the location of
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Tom Warren,
>
> In message you wrote:
>>
>> Let me double-check. IIRC, one (cmd_gpio) didn't apply since it was
>> from another SoC and didn't have the commands we use on Tegra, and the
>> other (where the driver should go) ended with Mi
Dear Tom Warren,
In message you wrote:
>
> Let me double-check. IIRC, one (cmd_gpio) didn't apply since it was
> from another SoC and didn't have the commands we use on Tegra, and the
> other (where the driver should go) ended with Mike saying "i'm not
> sure sweating the location of the driver i
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Tom Warren,
>
> In message you wrote:
>>
>> I believe this patchset should be GTG. Are there any objections
>> outstanding that I've failed to answer?
>
> GTG ???
Good To Go.
>
>
> I did not see any cleanup resulting from Mike's commen
Dear Tom Warren,
In message you wrote:
>
> I believe this patchset should be GTG. Are there any objections
> outstanding that I've failed to answer?
GTG ???
I did not see any cleanup resulting from Mike's comment here:
05/02 Mike Frysinger Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] GPIO: Tegra2: add GPIO dri
Albert/Wolfgang,
I believe this patchset should be GTG. Are there any objections
outstanding that I've failed to answer?
Thanks,
Tom
On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 12:49, Michael Walle wrote:
>> Am Di, 3.05.2011, 00:45, schrieb Tom Warren:
>>>
On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 12:49, Michael Walle wrote:
> Am Di, 3.05.2011, 00:45, schrieb Tom Warren:
>> Changes in V2:
>> - use 'gpio_pin' enum in gpio.h (Simon Glass review request)
>> - change 'GPIO_PORT8' to 'GPIO_FULLPORT' (Simon Glass request)
>> - change 'offset' to 'pin' globa
Am Di, 3.05.2011, 00:45, schrieb Tom Warren:
> Signed-off-by: Tom Warren
> ---
> Changes in V2:
> - use 'gpio_pin' enum in gpio.h (Simon Glass review request)
> - change 'GPIO_PORT8' to 'GPIO_FULLPORT' (Simon Glass request)
> - change 'offset' to 'pin' globally
>
> arch/arm/incl
Mike,
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Monday, May 02, 2011 18:45:47 Tom Warren wrote:
>> +U_BOOT_CMD(
>> + gpio, 5, 1, do_gpio,
>
> looks to me like you're duplicating a lot of code that already exists in
> common/cmd_gpio.c
> -mike
>
Possible - this wa
On Monday, May 02, 2011 18:45:47 Tom Warren wrote:
> +U_BOOT_CMD(
> + gpio, 5, 1, do_gpio,
looks to me like you're duplicating a lot of code that already exists in
common/cmd_gpio.c
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
13 matches
Mail list logo
