From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Shevchenko Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] ACPI / gpio: Add support for naming GPIOs Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 20:08:15 +0300 Message-ID: References: <20160929133944.158596-1-mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com> <20160929133944.158596-3-mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com> <20161009150127.GY30800@lahna.fi.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Return-path: Received: from mail-oi0-f68.google.com ([209.85.218.68]:36504 "EHLO mail-oi0-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751609AbcJIRIR (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Oct 2016 13:08:17 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20161009150127.GY30800@lahna.fi.intel.com> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Mika Westerberg Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linus Walleij , Alexandre Courbot , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 6:01 PM, Mika Westerberg wrote: > On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 08:05:14PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 4:39 PM, Mika Westerberg >> wrote: >> > + if (!chip->names) >> > + acpi_gpiochip_set_names(acpi_gpio); >> > + >> >> I'm okay with this, though wouldn't be better to call it >> unconditionally like it's done for below call and move check inside? > > DT does it like this. I can move the check inside the function as well. Up to you. If it even worth to change. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko