On 23 November 2012 17:44, Lee Jones <lee.jo...@linaro.org> wrote:
> I'm saying, just leave it where it is.
So you are suggesting this code:
stmpe_gpio->chip.base = pdata ? pdata->gpio_base : -1;
if (pdata)
stmpe_gpio->norequest_mask = pdata->norequest_mask;
else if (np)
of_property_read_u32(np, "st,norequest-mask",
&pdata->norequest_mask);
Right? Then yes i can do it.
>> >> + if (np)
>> >> + of_property_read_u32(np, "st,norequest-mask",
>> >> + &pdata->norequest_mask);
>> >
>> > Can you explain to me what this does?
>>
>> You mean pdata->norequest_mask? It marks few gpios as unusable.
>> Because these pads might be used by other blocks of stmpe.
>
> I'm not sure if that should be set with DT or not.
>
> Second opinion anyone?
Why i kept it in DT is because it is board dependent and there is no better
way of communicating this from board to driver.
--
viresh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
