Re: [PATCH] phylib: make mdio-gpio work without OF (v2)

2008-11-04 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 23:45, David Brownell wrote: > On Tuesday 04 November 2008, Mike Frysinger wrote: >> > That's generally the preferred way to handle #ifdeffery. >> > But I could imagine OF isn't (yet?) set up to handle it. >> >> i agree completely with the inclination to do it all in C as you

Re: [PATCH 1/6] [PWM] Generic PWM API implementation

2008-11-04 Thread David Brownell
On Tuesday 04 November 2008, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 18:55, David Brownell wrote: > > On Tuesday 04 November 2008, Bill Gatliff wrote: > >> So, what's the next step? How do I advocate for getting > >> this API into mainline? > > > > The number of backing implementations seem

Re: [PATCH] phylib: make mdio-gpio work without OF (v2)

2008-11-04 Thread David Brownell
On Tuesday 04 November 2008, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > That's generally the preferred way to handle #ifdeffery. > > But I could imagine OF isn't (yet?) set up to handle it. > > i agree completely with the inclination to do it all in C as you've > suggested and let the compiler do dead code elimina

Re: [PATCH 1/6] [PWM] Generic PWM API implementation

2008-11-04 Thread Bill Gatliff
Mike Frysinger wrote: > every Blackfin processor so far has had dedicated PWM hardware in it, > so a backend driver for that arch would show up ... >From who? I don't have that hardware. I'm happy to hear that someone is working on it, though, and I would be happy to help review. > i'm guessing

Re: [PATCH 1/6] [PWM] Generic PWM API implementation

2008-11-04 Thread Bill Gatliff
David Brownell wrote: > > Patches #1 and #2 seem to be in the wrong order ... and > #2 shouldn't give the header's full pathname. I'd have > merged the two, myself. Ok, that's good feedback. > Patch #6 seems to remove LEDS_ATMEL_PWM from Kconfig but > leave the driver around ... and restore the

Re: [PATCH 1/6] [PWM] Generic PWM API implementation

2008-11-04 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 18:55, David Brownell wrote: > On Tuesday 04 November 2008, Bill Gatliff wrote: >> So, what's the next step? How do I advocate for getting >> this API into mainline? > > The number of backing implementations seemed a bit low ... > just one. And that's switching Atmel's dedi

Re: [PATCH] phylib: make mdio-gpio work without OF (v2)

2008-11-04 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 19:04, David Brownell wrote: > On Tuesday 04 November 2008, Grant Likely wrote: >> At this point, instead of #ifdeffing the function signature, I would >> much rather see this generalized as something like >> 'mdio_gpio_setup()'. Then move the OF and non-OF specific bits int

Re: [PATCH] phylib: make mdio-gpio work without OF (v2)

2008-11-04 Thread David Brownell
On Tuesday 04 November 2008, Grant Likely wrote: > At this point, instead of #ifdeffing the function signature, I would > much rather see this generalized as something like > 'mdio_gpio_setup()'.  Then move the OF and non-OF specific bits into > two new functions; mdio_ofgpio_probe() and mdio_gpio_

Re: [PATCH 1/6] [PWM] Generic PWM API implementation

2008-11-04 Thread David Brownell
On Tuesday 04 November 2008, Bill Gatliff wrote: > This is literally the only feedback I have received. I was waiting for followup too. I finally get onto this list (for some reason the list management software dropped several previous "please add me" requests) and ... nothing!! Patches #1 and

Re: [PATCH 1/6] [PWM] Generic PWM API implementation

2008-11-04 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 15:16, Bill Gatliff wrote: > Mike Frysinger wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 14:14, Bill Gatliff wrote: >>> +int pwm_register(struct pwm_device *pwm) >>> +{ >>> + struct pwm_channel *p; >>> + int wchan; >>> + int ret = 0; >> >> the initialization to 0 here

Re: [PATCH 1/6] [PWM] Generic PWM API implementation

2008-11-04 Thread Bill Gatliff
Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 14:14, Bill Gatliff wrote: >> +int pwm_register(struct pwm_device *pwm) >> +{ >> + struct pwm_channel *p; >> + int wchan; >> + int ret = 0; > > the initialization to 0 here isnt needed This is literally the only feedback I have rec

Re: [PATCH] phylib: make mdio-gpio work without OF (v2)

2008-11-04 Thread Grant Likely
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 7:45 AM, Paulius Zaleckas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > make mdio-gpio work with non OpenFirmware gpio implementation. > > Aditional changes to mdio-gpio: > - use gpio_request() and gpio_free() > - place irq[] array in struct mdio_gpio_info > - add module description, author a

Re: [PATCH] phylib: make mdio-gpio work without OF (v2)

2008-11-04 Thread Grant Likely
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 8:45 AM, Marc Pignat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hiü > > On Tuesday 04 November 2008, Paulius Zaleckas wrote: >> make mdio-gpio work with non OpenFirmware gpio implementation. > > of_gpio.c provides generic gpio compatible gpios. > > Why not remove all OF specific code from

Re: [PATCH] phylib: make mdio-gpio work without OF (v2)

2008-11-04 Thread Marc Pignat
Hiü On Tuesday 04 November 2008, Paulius Zaleckas wrote: > make mdio-gpio work with non OpenFirmware gpio implementation. of_gpio.c provides generic gpio compatible gpios. Why not remove all OF specific code from this file and add another one creating the struct mdio_gpio_platform_data using OF

[PATCH] phylib: make mdio-gpio work without OF (v2)

2008-11-04 Thread Paulius Zaleckas
make mdio-gpio work with non OpenFirmware gpio implementation. Aditional changes to mdio-gpio: - use gpio_request() and gpio_free() - place irq[] array in struct mdio_gpio_info - add module description, author and license - add note about compiling this driver as module - rename mdc and mdio funct