On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 03:30:36PM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:

On Thu, 19 May 2011, Sascha Hauer wrote:

quoted

On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 09:56:32PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:

quoted

On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 02:21:27PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:

quoted

On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 10:56 AM, Shawn Guo [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

I start working on moving mxs gpio (arch/arm/mach-mxs/gpio.c) into
driver/gpio, and I see the possibility to go a different approach
from U300 one posted here.

I've tried to figure out what relation the mail has to the U300 driver
but cannot find any, more than that it's moving a driver... Please
start a new mail thread.

I will post mxs-gpio driver once I get it done.  Then please review
the code and see the difference between mxs-gpio and u300-gpio,
though these hardwares have something in common.

I'm pretty sure they have something in common and even more that *all*
gpio drivers have something in common. I wonder if it really makes sense
to move the gpio driver to drivers/gpio without creating a common
mmio_gpio_chip beforehand. This can't be very hard.

I do think that performing the move first will make a subsequent 
conversion easier.  And since a move is a no-op from a functional point 
of view, it is the safest thing to do first.

That's also what I heard on UDS week.  Move stuff into driver/gpio
first, then try to find the pattern in those drivers and come up with
some framework.

-- 
Regards,
Shawn