Re: question on generic gpio interface

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 4/17/07, David Brownell <[email protected]> wrote:
In this case I'm not entirely sure how it'd work.  I've seen a few
drivers which let userspace peek and poke at GPIO signals -- like
one for Gumstix boards -- but generalizing the model isn't simple.
Sub-problems include:

 - Configuring the relevant pins.  Especially for SOC cases, GPIO
   roles are multiplexed with several others.  So there are two
   issues:  (a) the platform-specific setup of that multiplexing,
   plus (b) the board-specific knowledge of what pins are truly
   available for use as GPIOs, and not otherwise in use.


what about create a module "user-gpio" for example that could request
some gpios that the board could have declared using resource
subsystem, like this:

static struct resource foo_gpio_resource[] = {
       [0] = {
               .start = 10,
               .end  = 11,
               .flags = IORESOURCE_GPIO,
       },
      [1] = {
               .start = 26,
               .end  = 31,
               .flags = IORESOURCE_GPIO,
       },
};

struct platform_device foo_device_usergpio = {
       .name           = "user-gpio",
       .id             = -1,
       .num_resources  = ARRAY_SIZE(foo_gpio_resource),
       .resource       = foo_gpio_resource,
};

This way "user-gpio" module knows which pins are avalaible to userspace.

 - Enumerating those GPIOs to userspace.  One SOC might have just
   a few dozen, another might have a few hundred; and then there
   are all the board-specific ones, on FPGA or I2C chips etc.


This point is actully the one where I'm really not sure...

Enumerating user GPIOs would always start from 0 to GPIO_USER_NR - 1
and an application that need to be portable should use a config file
to specify which GPIO num to use...

 - Exposing those pins to userspace.  It'd be unsafe to let pins
   claimed by drivers be managed by userspace; the default should
   be that only unclaimed GPIOs can be accessed.


Well an extreme solution would be to test in gpio_request(), if the
passed gpio nr is a user one then gpio_request() would return an
error. We could use is_user_gpio() function implemented by user-gpio
module

Thanks
--
Francis
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux