Re: [RFC PATCH] gpio: uapi: v2 proposal

2020-06-09 Thread Bartosz Golaszewski
wt., 9 cze 2020 o 11:43 Kent Gibson napisał(a): > > On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 10:03:42AM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > > sob., 6 cze 2020 o 03:56 Kent Gibson napisał(a): > > > > > > > [snip!] > > > > > > > > > > I'd say yes - consolidation and reuse of data structures is always > > > > good

Re: [RFC PATCH] gpio: uapi: v2 proposal

2020-06-09 Thread Kent Gibson
On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 10:03:42AM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > sob., 6 cze 2020 o 03:56 Kent Gibson napisał(a): > > > > [snip!] > > > > > > > I'd say yes - consolidation and reuse of data structures is always > > > good and normally they are going to be wrapped in some kind of > > >

Re: [RFC PATCH] gpio: uapi: v2 proposal

2020-06-09 Thread Bartosz Golaszewski
sob., 6 cze 2020 o 03:56 Kent Gibson napisał(a): > [snip!] > > > > I'd say yes - consolidation and reuse of data structures is always > > good and normally they are going to be wrapped in some kind of > > low-level user-space library anyway. > > > > Ok, and I've changed the values field name to

Re: [RFC PATCH] gpio: uapi: v2 proposal

2020-06-05 Thread Kent Gibson
On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 11:53:05AM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > czw., 4 cze 2020 o 18:00 Kent Gibson napisał(a): > > > > [snip!] > > > > > + > > > > +enum gpioline_edge { > > > > + GPIOLINE_EDGE_NONE = 0, > > > > + GPIOLINE_EDGE_RISING= 1, > > > > +

Re: [RFC PATCH] gpio: uapi: v2 proposal

2020-06-05 Thread Bartosz Golaszewski
czw., 4 cze 2020 o 18:00 Kent Gibson napisał(a): > [snip!] > > > + > > > +enum gpioline_edge { > > > + GPIOLINE_EDGE_NONE = 0, > > > + GPIOLINE_EDGE_RISING= 1, > > > + GPIOLINE_EDGE_FALLING = 2, > > > + GPIOLINE_EDGE_BOTH =

Re: [RFC PATCH] gpio: uapi: v2 proposal

2020-06-04 Thread Kent Gibson
On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 02:43:08PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > sob., 16 maj 2020 o 08:45 Kent Gibson napisał(a): > > > > Add a new version of the uAPI to address existing 32/64bit alignment > > issues, add support for debounce, and provide some future proofing by > > adding padding

Re: [RFC PATCH] gpio: uapi: v2 proposal

2020-06-04 Thread Kent Gibson
On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 02:06:31PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > śr., 27 maj 2020 o 07:58 Linus Walleij napisał(a): > > > > On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 4:19 PM Kent Gibson wrote: > > > > > > > +struct gpioline_config { > > > > > + __u8 default_values[GPIOLINES_MAX]; > > > > > > > > So 32

Re: [RFC PATCH] gpio: uapi: v2 proposal

2020-06-04 Thread Bartosz Golaszewski
sob., 16 maj 2020 o 08:45 Kent Gibson napisał(a): > > Add a new version of the uAPI to address existing 32/64bit alignment > issues, add support for debounce, and provide some future proofing by > adding padding reserved for future use. > > Signed-off-by: Kent Gibson > I'm a bit late to the

Re: [RFC PATCH] gpio: uapi: v2 proposal

2020-06-04 Thread Bartosz Golaszewski
śr., 27 maj 2020 o 07:58 Linus Walleij napisał(a): > > On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 4:19 PM Kent Gibson wrote: > > > > > +struct gpioline_config { > > > > + __u8 default_values[GPIOLINES_MAX]; > > > > > > So 32 bytes > > > > > > > Actually that one is 64 bytes, which is the same as v1, i.e.

Re: [RFC PATCH] gpio: uapi: v2 proposal

2020-05-26 Thread Linus Walleij
On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 4:19 PM Kent Gibson wrote: > > > +struct gpioline_config { > > > + __u8 default_values[GPIOLINES_MAX]; > > > > So 32 bytes > > > > Actually that one is 64 bytes, which is the same as v1, i.e. GPIOLINES_MAX > is the same as GPIOHANDLES_MAX - just renamed. > > On the

Re: [RFC PATCH] gpio: uapi: v2 proposal

2020-05-26 Thread Kent Gibson
On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 06:24:04PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > sob., 16 maj 2020 o 08:45 Kent Gibson napisał(a): > > > > Add a new version of the uAPI to address existing 32/64bit alignment > > issues, add support for debounce, and provide some future proofing by > > adding padding

Re: [RFC PATCH] gpio: uapi: v2 proposal

2020-05-26 Thread Kent Gibson
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 11:04:25AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > +Cc: Ville > > Ville, this is a v2 of the GPIO ABI we discussed with some time ago. > If you have time to briefly look at it and perhaps comment if it's > right way to go. > > On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 9:50 AM Kent Gibson wrote: >

Re: [RFC PATCH] gpio: uapi: v2 proposal

2020-05-26 Thread Andy Shevchenko
+Cc: Ville Ville, this is a v2 of the GPIO ABI we discussed with some time ago. If you have time to briefly look at it and perhaps comment if it's right way to go. On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 9:50 AM Kent Gibson wrote: > > Add a new version of the uAPI to address existing 32/64bit alignment >

Re: [RFC PATCH] gpio: uapi: v2 proposal

2020-05-25 Thread Bartosz Golaszewski
sob., 16 maj 2020 o 08:45 Kent Gibson napisał(a): > > Add a new version of the uAPI to address existing 32/64bit alignment > issues, add support for debounce, and provide some future proofing by > adding padding reserved for future use. > > Signed-off-by: Kent Gibson > > --- > > This patch is a

Re: [RFC PATCH] gpio: uapi: v2 proposal

2020-05-25 Thread Kent Gibson
On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 10:39:42AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 8:45 AM Kent Gibson wrote: > > > Add a new version of the uAPI to address existing 32/64bit alignment > > issues, add support for debounce, and provide some future proofing by > > adding padding reserved for

Re: [RFC PATCH] gpio: uapi: v2 proposal

2020-05-25 Thread Linus Walleij
On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 8:45 AM Kent Gibson wrote: > Add a new version of the uAPI to address existing 32/64bit alignment > issues, add support for debounce, and provide some future proofing by > adding padding reserved for future use. > > Signed-off-by: Kent Gibson I don't see any major

[RFC PATCH] gpio: uapi: v2 proposal

2020-05-16 Thread Kent Gibson
Add a new version of the uAPI to address existing 32/64bit alignment issues, add support for debounce, and provide some future proofing by adding padding reserved for future use. Signed-off-by: Kent Gibson --- This patch is a proposal to replace the majority of the uAPI, so some background