[En-Nut-Discussion] Nut/OS GPIO API Initial Design and Current Status
harald.kipp at egnite.de
Mon Oct 15 10:23:58 CEST 2012
On 14.10.2012 22:12, Uwe Bonnes wrote:
>>>>>> "Harald" == Harald Kipp <harald.kipp at egnite.de> writes:
> Harald> May be you can, but I have my doubts, that anyone will maintain
> Harald> such a beast or port it easily to a new platform. It will be a
> Harald> PITS, which indeed hurts. ;-)
> Harald> Ulrich, you are mainly explaining advantages of having an API
> Harald> for GPIO, which I did not put into question. My objection is,
> Harald> that this needs to be done in a portable API, available on all
> Harald> targets.
> Huch, where do we disagree now?
> Where do you disagree in the used of the Gpio API in owibus_bbif.c?
I do not disagree with the implementation of owibus_bbif.c. This driver
is designed to run on all platforms that provide Gpio. It must use the
portable Gpio API.
I disagree, for example, with arch\cm3\dev\stm\stm32_twi1.c. This is
STM32 specific code and don't need to use the portable Gpio API.
Several STM32 drivers extend the API with GPIO_PinAFConfig. Do you
intend to integrate this into GpioPinConfigSet?
More information about the En-Nut-Discussion