On Sun, 2008-11-23 at 13:31 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Thu 2008-11-20 17:05:56, Trent Piepho wrote:
> > On Mon, 17 Nov 2008, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2008-10-24 at 16:09 -0700, Trent Piepho wrote:
> > >> + if (template->keep_state)
> > >> + state = !!gpio_get_value(led_dat->gpio) ^
> > >> led_dat->active_low;
> > >> + else
> > >> + state = template->default_state;
> > >>
> > >> state = of_get_property(child, "default-state", NULL);
> > >> led.default_state = state && !strcmp(state, "on");
> > >> + led.keep_state = state && !strcmp(state, "keep");
> > >>
> > >> +++ b/include/linux/leds.h
> > >> @@ -138,7 +138,8 @@ struct gpio_led {
> > >> const char *default_trigger;
> > >> unsigned gpio;
> > >> u8 active_low;
> > >> - u8 default_state;
> > >> + u8 default_state; /* 0 = off, 1 = on */
> > >> + u8 keep_state; /* overrides default_state */
> > >> };
> > >
> > > How about something simpler here, just make default state have three
> > > different values - "keep", "on" and "off"? I'm not keen on having two
> > > different state variables like this.
> >
> > I thought of that, but it ends up being more complex. Instead of just
> > using:
> > static const struct gpio_led myled = {
> > .name = "something",
> > .keep_state = 1,
> > }
> >
> > You'd do something like this:
> > .default_state = LEDS_GPIO_DEFSTATE_KEEP,
> >
> > Is that better?
>
> Yes.
Yes, agreed, much better.
Richard
--
Richard Purdie
Intel Open Source Technology Centre
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
