On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 5:06 PM, Lorenzo Pieralisi
[off-list ref] wrote:

On Thu, Jan 08, 2015 at 11:53:15PM +0000, Rob Herring wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 1:44 PM, Linus Walleij [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 8:28 PM, Rob Herring [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

+                               reg = <0x00000 0x1000>;
+
+                               v2m_led_gpios: sys_led@08 {
+                                       compatible = "arm,vexpress-sysreg,sys_led";
+                                       gpio-controller;
+                                       #gpio-cells = <2>;
+                               };

These are not GPIOs. These are LED registers really.

A register bit that controls an i/o signal sounds like a GPIO to me.

To me too. I agree that definining a gpio-controller for every possible
gpio pin would soon get unwieldy, but hey, the choice made for vexpress
leds makes perfect sense to me, after all they are gpio signals
connected to leds, and there is a driver for that in the kernel:

drivers/leds/leds-gpio.c

we could move this stuff to syscon-leds, but honestly I think is one of those
things we could argue forever about that.

OK it's just so that the GPIO maintainer disagrees with the way
gpio-controller is being used here, and I consequently NACK it
so for the record add my:

Nacked-by: Linus Walleij [off-list ref]

To this patch if/when merging it through ARM SoC.

If the DT people think it is a good way to describe the hardware
and override this then I will live with it I guess...

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