Re: [PATCH soc-camera] Replace NO_GPIO with gpio_is_valid()
- Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 20:09:58 +0100 (CET)
- From: Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [PATCH soc-camera] Replace NO_GPIO with gpio_is_valid()
On Fri, 15 Feb 2008, Trent Piepho wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Feb 2008, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> > Upon suggestion by David Brownell use a gpio_is_valid() predicate
> > instead of an explicit NO_GPIO macro. The respective patch to
> > include/asm-generic/gpio.h has been accepted upstream.
> >
> > #else
> > - mt9m001->switch_gpio = NO_GPIO;
> > + mt9m001->switch_gpio = -EINVAL;
> > #endif
>
> Is that part right?
Yes, it is right. NO_GPIO was never accepted.
> I thought there would still be a NO_GPIO value for
> when you wanted to set or return an invalid gpio number. gpio_is_valid()
> is a predicate so it doesn't help you create a gpio number that isn't valid
> (other than something absurd like testing all unsigned ints for one that
> fails), one still needs NO_GPIO or something like it. Using NO_GPIO seems
> like a better idea that hoping that -EINVAL happens to be invalid on every
> platform.
Well, as you know, that was also my idea at the beginning, until David
persuaded me otherwise:-) The thing is, an invalid gpio definition is not
platform-specific, it is a part of the API.
Thanks
Guennadi
---
Guennadi Liakhovetski
--
video4linux-list mailing list
Unsubscribe mailto:video4linux-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/video4linux-list