On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 12:37 PM Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 09:47:33AM +0000, Alex Kiernan wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 8, 2020 at 12:06 AM Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 05, 2020 at 08:10:56PM +0100, Luka Kovacic wrote: > > > > > > > Use the correct return value in function do_gpio() and update > > > > commands documentation with the return values from command_ret_t enum. > > > > > > > > CMD_RET_SUCCESS is returned on command success and CMD_RET_FAILURE is > > > > returned on command failure. > > > > > > > > The command was returning the pin value, which caused confusion when > > > > debugging (#define DEBUG). > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Luka Kovacic <luka.kova...@sartura.hr> > > > > Tested-by: Robert Marko <robert.ma...@sartura.hr> > > > > > > Applied to u-boot/master, thanks! > > > > > > > I just pulled in HEAD for a test build and our boot scripts are broken > > with this gpio change - I don't see a way to get the value of a gpio > > pin in a script now? > > > > Whilst I agree what's there was wrong, I'm really not sure we can > > change an existing interface like this. > > Sigh, this is what I was worried about. If folks don't have a > suggestion on how to correct things again I'm going to revert this > change, sorry for the noise, thanks! >
There's a one-liner which fixes it for me (implementing the suggestion of retaining the behaviour for gpio input): https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1252077/ -- Alex Kiernan
