On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 1:35 AM, Stephen Warren [off-list ref] wrote:

On 02/25/2014 02:13 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:

quoted

So it is basically there to satisfy the habit in some device
tree bindings to name gpio arrays instead of just passing gpios = <...>;
(The latter should be encouraged going forward.)

Do you really want to switch from named GPIO lookups to index-based GPIO
lookups?

I don't know what I want. I only know that ACPI and DT people
are starting to step on each others feet.

Index-based lookups make it much harder to extend the DT
binding in a backwards-compatible fashion, especially in the face of
optional GPIOs (of which all of CD, WP, power are).

You're probably right. At the same time it makes the world complex
for the ambition to use the same interface for DT and ACPI alike.

Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html