Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 12 May 2016 14:40:29 -0600
From:      Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org>
To:        Oleksandr Tymoshenko <gonzo@FreeBSD.org>, src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r299563 - head/sys/dev/gpio
Message-ID:  <1463085629.1180.75.camel@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <201605122012.u4CKCkVD040893@repo.freebsd.org>
References:  <201605122012.u4CKCkVD040893@repo.freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 2016-05-12 at 20:12 +0000, Oleksandr Tymoshenko wrote:
> Author: gonzo
> Date: Thu May 12 20:12:45 2016
> New Revision: 299563
> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/299563
> 
> Log:
>   Add gpiobus_release_pin function to release mapped pin
>   
>   Add gpiobus_release_pin as a counterpart for gpiobus_map_pin.
> Without it
>   it's impossible to properly release pin so if kernel module is
> reloaded
>   it can't re-use pins again

This reminds me that we (Michael Meloun & I) had talked on irc about
renaming gpiobus_map_pin() to gpiobus_acquire_pin() and adding a
release function.  Now we have the release, but its name really doesn't
scream that it's the inverse of map_pin.  Is it too late to rename map
to acquire?  (I'm not too wed to the 'acquire' name, 'allocate' would
also be a good candidate.  We also considered 'reserve' but that had
less of a "now I own it exclusively" feel to it.  'map' didn't feel
quite right because mapping pins in an FDT world is the responsibility
of the pinmux driver, not a gpio thing.)

-- Ian




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1463085629.1180.75.camel>