From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751815AbdBUK0b (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Feb 2017 05:26:31 -0500 Received: from mail-it0-f54.google.com ([209.85.214.54]:37631 "EHLO mail-it0-f54.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751467AbdBUK0X (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Feb 2017 05:26:23 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170208130039.GA28327@kroah.com> References: <20170208161113.1b597c01@canb.auug.org.au> <20170208092425.azqkx3nwf4jhsfz5@dell> <20170208130039.GA28327@kroah.com> From: Linus Walleij Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2017 11:26:21 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] serial: st-asc: Use new GPIOD API to obtain RTS pin To: Greg KH Cc: Lee Jones , Stephen Rothwell , "linux-next@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Boris Brezillon , Alexander Stein , Andy Shevchenko Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Greg KH wrote: >> - gpiod = devm_get_gpiod_from_child(port->dev, "rts", >> - &np->fwnode); >> - if (!IS_ERR(gpiod)) { >> - gpiod_direction_output(gpiod, 0); >> + gpiod = devm_fwnode_get_gpiod_from_child(port->dev, >> + "rts", >> + &np->fwnode, >> + GPIOD_OUT_LOW, >> + np->name); > > I can't apply this :( > > Usually, when you move apis around, you add it, then convert it, wait a > kernel release, then remove the old one. That allows for issues like > this when new code is added in one maintainer's branch but not yours. Sorry about this, I guess I got a bit stressed too recently so I was not able to solve this in the ultimate way. We converted over all existing users of the APIs but I guess I optimistically assumed no new users would be added in this kernel cycle, but of course they did.... this new driver was using it, Stephen fixed that up in next and now a patch to that driver arrived on top, ouch. > So how about reverting your "drop the function" patch and then wait for > -rc2 to really remove it? I never did a thing like this before, hm sorry for the inexperience. :( I did make an immutable branch like Andy suggested but didn't advertise it well enough. But as stated that approach sucks anyways. Typically I saw this suggestion right after sending the pull request to Torvalds (yeah I should have seen it first, my inbox is chaotic too, mea culpa). I'll follow up on it asking him not to pull that and look for a resolution like you suggest instead. Since it is three patches that then have users on top I guess it is best to add back the old prototype helper for this driver exclusively then fix it for -rc2. Yours, Linus Walleij