15 Mar
2009
15 Mar
'09
2:10 p.m.
Mark Brown broonie@sirena.org.uk writes:
Yes, that's what I'm asking for. I don't want to make it mandatory because only PXA27x is affected (might be worth naming the field for that actually) and the driver will already be implementing a default behaviour.
OK. It's just I'm not pretty convinced about the naming change. Feel free to change the patch if you want to.
Should this be handled like a casual gpio (ie. gpio 99) ?
I'm not sure what you mean by a casual GPIO?
I meant different from "special" gpios (ie. GPIO95 and GPIO113), which are "special" because they have an alternate function tied to AC97 reset.
Right, so would that one be better ?
Cheers.
-- Robert