On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 02:35:54PM -0800, Trent Piepho wrote: > On Thu, 27 Nov 2008, Paul Mackerras wrote: > > Anton Vorontsov writes: > > > >> Can we apply it? Paul, Benjamin? > >> > >> The patchwork url for this patch is: > >> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/6650/ > >> > >> > >> Thanks! > >> > >>> drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_upm.c | 2 +- > >>> drivers/net/fs_enet/fs_enet-main.c | 2 +- > >>> drivers/net/phy/mdio-ofgpio.c | 4 ++-- > >>> drivers/of/gpio.c | 13 ++++++++++--- > >>> drivers/serial/cpm_uart/cpm_uart_core.c | 2 +- > >>> include/linux/of_gpio.h | 21 +++++++++++++++++---- > >>> 6 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) > > > > That would need acks from Jeff Garzik and David Woodhouse. > > > > Alternatively you could add a new function (called, for instance, > > of_get_gpio_flags) with the extra parameter to eliminate the need to > > change any drivers at this stage, since they all seem to pass NULL for > > the flags argument. > > But if we did this every time any exported function needs to change, think > how bloated the API would be with cruft.
Stable API is nonsense, yes. But we tend to change the API evolutionary, not revolutionary. That is, 1. Implement of_get_gpio_flags(); 2. Now we can start using it (no stall in development, see?); 3. Then somebody comes with the _cleanup_ patch: "[PATCH] Merge of_get_gpio_flags() and of_get_gpio(), convert users" ^^ That patch is trivial and could be applied at any appropriate moment (i.e. when there are no of_*_gpio*() patches queued in the -next trees). And as time goes by, the patch collects all the needed Acks, no need to hurry -- it's trivial cleanup. -- Anton Vorontsov email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] irc://irc.freenode.net/bd2 _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev