-----Original Message----- From: Ajay Bhargav [mailto:ajay.bhargav@einfochips.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 9:44 AM To: Lei Wen Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de; Ashish Karkare; Prabhanjan Sarnaik; Prafulla Wadaskar Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/4] gpio: Adds GPIO driver support for Armada100
----- "Lei Wen" adrian.wenl@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Ajay,
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 12:01 PM, Ajay Bhargav ajay.bhargav@einfochips.com wrote:
How about merge this into current mvmfp.c? Just add some function into it, then no need another c file.
According to current ongoing development there is generic GPIO
framework being introduced. Its good if we keep gpio separate though they are connected to MFP too, It makes more sense if they are kept in different file. lets see what Prafulla has to say about this.
I think mvgpio.c will address gpio driver, it can be used by Kirkwood, Orion arch too where as MFP is totally different on this core than armada.
To me it makes more sense to call mvgpio.c as gpio driver and mvmfp.c as Multi Function Pin driver.
Ok. BTW, I also have some comments towards your patch. You define a huge structure in arch/arm/include/asm/arch-armada100/gpio.h, which don't looks so good to me.
Comments are welcome. I know its huge.. I just followed what is suggested by Wolfgang. He told not to use BASE+OFFSET thing. I am bit confused here whom to follow :)
You have to follow all :-), more reviewers more better code output. BASE+OFFSET strictly not recommended.
Macro here save a lot space, and keep the code clean.
Best regards, Lei
Prafulla is suggesting something.. Let me ask him how he want this.
I think lei and me are suggesting similar things, macros should be used precisely, the code should be small and smarter.
Regards.. Prafulla . .