Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] gpio: Add a block GPIO API to gpiolib

[Linus Walleij]

On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Roland Stigge <stigge@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Besides what I discussed with JC and Linus, I find the unsigned int
> (i.e. u32 or u64, depending on the arch) quite appealing. It is a nice
> compromise between my general bit mapped data model (variable size *u8
> array) and the bool *values list. Even maps easily onto a single sysfs
> entry for values, by abstracting a gpio list to an actual data word.
>
> What do others think? JC? Linus? I'm considering this (unsigned int
> data) a valid option.

I think we mostly use an unsigned long for such stuff as IRQ flags
and ioctl() parameters in the kernel.

In this case it has the upside that it will be 32bit on 32bit systems
and 64bit on 64bit systems if I'm not mistaken.

Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/