[U-Boot] [PATCH 1/2] gpio: Add GPIO driver framework for Marvell SoCs

[Prafulla Wadaskar]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ajay Bhargav [mailto:ajay.bhargav at einfochips.com]
> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2011 10:08 AM
> To: Prafulla Wadaskar
> Cc: u-boot at lists.denx.de
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] gpio: Add GPIO driver framework for Marvell
> SoCs
> 
> Hi Prafulla,
> 
> Thank you so much for feedback.
> 
> > In this case mvgpio.c is enabling support for gpio framework that will
> > be interfaced using asm/gpio.h.
> >
> > 1. You can split stuff in mvgpio.h to asm/arch/gpio.h and/or mvgpio.c
> > 2. you can move it to drivers/gpio/
> >
> > I would recommend first option.
> >
> So you mean the first patch will have only mvgpio.c that enables the
> support
> for gpio for Marvell SoCs and then second patch will enable support for
> Armada
> series via gpio.h file. So if anyone want to use mvgpio.c he/she should
> write a
> compatible version of gpio.h in their arch folder. I hope i am getting
> your right.

I don't mind if you merge these two patches, any future support will add gpio.h

> 
> > > +static int get_gpio_base(int bank)
> > > +{
> > > +        switch (bank) {
> > > +        case 0:
> > > +                return GPIO_BANK0_BASE;
> > > +        case 1:
> > > +                return GPIO_BANK1_BASE;
> > > +        case 2:
> > > +                return GPIO_BANK2_BASE;
> > > +        case 3:
> > > +                return GPIO_BANK3_BASE;
> > > +        }
> > > +        return 0;
> > > +}
> >
> > As discussed, this would be preferred macro in gpio.h
> >
> I am finding it difficult to fit this as a macro. so i thought to have
> it as
> inline function in gpio.h will that be ok?

Inline function should be okay

Regards..
Prafulla . . . 

> 
> Regards,
> Ajay Bhargav