Hi,

On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 12:11:56AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:

On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 6:43 PM, Chen-Yu Tsai [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 12:47 AM, Arnd Bergmann [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

+- NAME_shutdown-gpios  : GPIO phandle to shutdown control
+                         (phandle must be the second)
+- NAME_reset-gpios     : GPIO phandle to reset control
+
+NAME must match the rfkill-name property. NAME_shutdown-gpios or
+NAME_reset-gpios, or both, must be defined.
+

I don't understand this part. Why do you include the name in the
gpios property, rather than just hardcoding the property strings
to "shutdown-gpios" and "reset-gpios"?

This quirk is a result of how gpiod_get_index implements device tree
lookup.

Why can't it just have a single property "gpios", where the first
element is the reset GPIO and the second is the shutdown GPIO?

rfkill-gpio does this:

gpio = devm_gpiod_get_index(&pdev->dev, rfkill->reset_name, 0);
gpio = devm_gpiod_get_index(&pdev->dev, rfkill->shutdown_name, 1);

The passed con ID name parameter is only there for the device
tree case it seems. (ACPI ignores it.) So what about you just
don't pass it at all and patch it to do like this instead:

gpio = devm_gpiod_get_index(&pdev->dev, NULL, 0);
gpio = devm_gpiod_get_index(&pdev->dev, NULL, 1);

Heikki, are you OK with this change?

Yes, definitely. That is much cleaner.

Thanks,

-- 
heikki
--
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