linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] gpio MIPS/OCTEON: Add a driver for OCTEON's on-chip GPIO pin

To: David Daney <ddaney.cavm@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio MIPS/OCTEON: Add a driver for OCTEON's on-chip GPIO pins.
From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 11:43:32 -0700
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>, Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org>, Rob Herring <rob.herring@calxeda.com>, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org" <devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org>, David Daney <david.daney@cavium.com>
In-reply-to: <51C3497D.2050107@gmail.com>
List-archive: <http://www.linux-mips.org/archives/linux-mips/>
List-help: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?Subject=help>
List-id: linux-mips <linux-mips.eddie.linux-mips.org>
List-owner: <mailto:ralf@linux-mips.org>
List-post: <mailto:linux-mips@linux-mips.org>
List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0
List-subscribe: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?subject=subscribe%20linux-mips>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?subject=unsubscribe%20linux-mips>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <1371251915-18271-1-git-send-email-ddaney.cavm@gmail.com> <CACRpkdYHzBBbPNujYRGkMFGuQRzeYKs9jgfc3e3HWyxQFahvRQ@mail.gmail.com> <51C34584.8070301@gmail.com> <1371752324.2146.25.camel@joe-AO722> <51C3497D.2050107@gmail.com>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
On Thu, 2013-06-20 at 11:27 -0700, David Daney wrote:
> On 06/20/2013 11:18 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Thu, 2013-06-20 at 11:10 -0700, David Daney wrote:
> >> Sorry for not responding earlier, but my e-mail system seems to have
> >> malfunctioned with respect to this message...
> > []
> >> On 06/17/2013 01:51 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> >>>> +static int octeon_gpio_get(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned offset)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> +       struct octeon_gpio *gpio = container_of(chip, struct 
> >>>> octeon_gpio, chip);
> >>>> +       u64 read_bits = cvmx_read_csr(gpio->register_base + RX_DAT);
> >>>> +
> >>>> +       return ((1ull << offset) & read_bits) != 0;
> >>>
> >>> A common idiom we use for this is:
> >>>
> >>> return !!(read_bits & (1ull << offset));
> >>
> >> I hate that idiom, but if its use is a condition of accepting the patch,
> >> I will change it.
> >
> > Or use an even more common idiom and change the
> > function to return bool and let the compiler do it.
> >
> 
> ... but it is part of the gpiochip system interface, so it would have to 
> be done kernel wide.

Not really.  It's a local static function.

> Really I don't like the idea of GPIO lines having Boolean truth values 
> associated with them.  Some represent things that are active-high and 
> others active-low.  Converting the pin voltage being above or below a 
> given threshold to something other than zero or one would in my opinion 
> be confusing.

No worries, just offering options.  Your code, your choice.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>