From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751446AbdAaJcj (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Jan 2017 04:32:39 -0500 Received: from mail.free-electrons.com ([62.4.15.54]:45456 "EHLO mail.free-electrons.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751302AbdAaJcI (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Jan 2017 04:32:08 -0500 Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 10:24:24 +0100 From: Boris Brezillon To: Dmitry Torokhov Cc: Linus Walleij , Alexandre Courbot , linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-input@vger.kernel.org, Bryan Wu , Richard Purdie , Jacek Anaszewski , linux-leds@vger.kernel.org, Tomi Valkeinen , linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Russell King Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] gpio: Rename devm_get_gpiod_from_child() Message-ID: <20170131102424.7b68c0d4@bbrezillon> In-Reply-To: <20170131091155.GH8311@dtor-ws> References: <1485790909-2915-1-git-send-email-boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> <1485790909-2915-2-git-send-email-boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> <20170131010607.GC35974@dtor-ws> <20170131090432.72a1b1b8@bbrezillon> <20170131084447.GD8311@dtor-ws> <20170131100721.22c2388d@bbrezillon> <20170131091155.GH8311@dtor-ws> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.13.2 (GTK+ 2.24.30; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 01:11:55 -0800 Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 10:07:21AM +0100, Boris Brezillon wrote: > > On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 00:44:47 -0800 > > Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 09:04:32AM +0100, Boris Brezillon wrote: > > > > On Mon, 30 Jan 2017 17:06:07 -0800 > > > > Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 04:41:48PM +0100, Boris Brezillon wrote: > > > > > > Rename devm_get_gpiod_from_child() into > > > > > > devm_fwnode_get_gpiod_from_child() to reflect the fact that this > > > > > > function is operating on a fwnode object. > > > > > > > > > > I believe this is completely pointless rename. Are you planning on > > > > > adding devm_of_get_gpiod_from_child()? Or > > > > > devm_acpt_get_gpiod_from_child()? (I sure hope not). > > > > > > > > Of course not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, on what object? Does it take fwnode as first argument? Or maybe we > > > > > should call it devm_dev_const_charp_fwnode_get_gpiod_from_child() so we > > > > > know types of all arguments? > > > > > > > > Linus suggested to rename this function [1]. I personally don't care > > > > much about the name, though I agree with Linus that names should be > > > > consistent and descriptive. Moreover, he's the maintainer, and I tend > > > > to follow maintainers suggestion when I contribute to a specific > > > > subsystem. > > > > > > OK, I did not know that that was Linus' request, my objection still > > > stands. > > > > > > > > > > > IIUC, you're concerned about the length of this function name. If I had > > > > to drop something it would be the _from_child() suffix, because the > > > > function is not even checking that the child parameter is actually a > > > > direct child (or a descendant) of device->fwnode. > > > > > > OK, that sounds better. Actually, we already have > > > fwnode_get_named_gpiod(), unfortunately it does not do suffixes > > > permutations. There are also no users, except > > > devm_get_gpiod_from_child(). So I would: > > > > > > - rename fwnode_get_named_gpiod() -> static __fwnode_get_named_gpiod() > > > - made new fwnode_get_named_gpiod() that did suffix permutation and > > > called __fwnode_get_named_gpiod() (or pulled its implementation > > > inline) > > > > Sorry but I don't follow you. Why do you need > > __fwnode_get_named_gpiod(), > > You do not need it, it will just reduce size of the patch if you use > it. I'd be perfectly fine not with having it and have everything in > fwnode_get_named_gpiod(). Okay. > > > and what is the suffix permutation you're > > mentioning here? > > devm_get_gpiod_from_child() tries to apply "-gpio" and "-gpios" suffixes > to the supplied GPIO ID while current fwnode_get_named_gpiod() takes > property name literally. fwnode_get_named_gpiod() just mimics what of_get_named_gpiod_flags(), acpi_node_get_gpiod(), of_find_gpio() and acpi_find_gpio() do. It would be weird/inconsistent to have the con_id suffixing logic moved in the fwnode_get_named_gpiod() (if that's what you're suggesting, but I'm not sure it is).