Re: [PATCH v2] pinctrl: document semantics vs GPIO

2012-09-17 Thread Linus Walleij
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 7:16 PM, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 09/14/2012 07:49 AM, Linus Walleij wrote: >> +If a pin control driver and a GPIO driver is dealing with the same pins >> +and the use cases involve multiplexing, you MUST implement the pin >> controller >> +as a back-end for the GPIO dr

Re: [PATCH v2] pinctrl: document semantics vs GPIO

2012-09-14 Thread Stephen Warren
On 09/14/2012 07:49 AM, Linus Walleij wrote: > From: Linus Walleij > > The semantics of the interactions between GPIO and pinctrl may be > unclear, e.g. which one do you request first? This amends the > documentation to make this clear. > +If a pin control driver and a GPIO driver is dealing wit

Re: [PATCH v2] pinctrl: document semantics vs GPIO

2012-09-14 Thread Domenico Andreoli
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 03:49:47PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > From: Linus Walleij > > The semantics of the interactions between GPIO and pinctrl may be > unclear, e.g. which one do you request first? This amends the > documentation to make this clear. > > Reported-by: Domenico Andreoli > Sig

[PATCH v2] pinctrl: document semantics vs GPIO

2012-09-14 Thread Linus Walleij
From: Linus Walleij The semantics of the interactions between GPIO and pinctrl may be unclear, e.g. which one do you request first? This amends the documentation to make this clear. Reported-by: Domenico Andreoli Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij --- ChangeLog v1->v2: - Reworded a bit in accordance