From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6931EC2BB1D for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 21:01:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35AE72051A for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 21:01:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726912AbgCQVB1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Mar 2020 17:01:27 -0400 Received: from metis.ext.pengutronix.de ([85.220.165.71]:50937 "EHLO metis.ext.pengutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726680AbgCQVB0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Mar 2020 17:01:26 -0400 Received: from pty.hi.pengutronix.de ([2001:67c:670:100:1d::c5]) by metis.ext.pengutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jEJKW-00039f-Bg; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 22:00:52 +0100 Received: from ukl by pty.hi.pengutronix.de with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1jEJKM-0003eU-V8; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 22:00:42 +0100 Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2020 22:00:42 +0100 From: Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= To: Thierry Reding Cc: Oleksandr Suvorov , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org, Paul Barker , Laurent Pinchart , Marcel Ziswiler , Igor Opaniuk , Philippe Schenker , Alexandre Belloni , Chen-Yu Tsai , Claudiu Beznea , Fabio Estevam , Florian Fainelli , Heiko Stuebner , Kevin Hilman , Ludovic Desroches , Maxime Ripard , NXP Linux Team , Nicolas Ferre , Palmer Dabbelt , Paul Cercueil , Paul Walmsley , Pengutronix Kernel Team , Ray Jui , Sascha Hauer , Scott Branden , Shawn Guo , Tony Prisk , bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com, linux-amlogic@lists.infradead.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/7] pwm: rename the PWM_POLARITY_INVERSED enum Message-ID: <20200317210042.ryrof3amr7fxp4w5@pengutronix.de> References: <20200317123231.2843297-1-oleksandr.suvorov@toradex.com> <20200317123231.2843297-2-oleksandr.suvorov@toradex.com> <20200317174043.GA1464607@ulmo> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20200317174043.GA1464607@ulmo> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2001:67c:670:100:1d::c5 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ukl@pengutronix.de X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on metis.ext.pengutronix.de); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-PTX-Original-Recipient: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello, On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 06:40:43PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote: > On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 02:32:25PM +0200, Oleksandr Suvorov wrote: > > The polarity enum definition PWM_POLARITY_INVERSED is misspelled. > > Rename it to PWM_POLARITY_INVERTED. > > It isn't misspelled. "inversed" is a synonym for "inverted". Both > spellings are correct. Some time ago I stumbled about "inversed", too. My spell checker doesn't know it and I checked some dictionaries and none of them knew that word: https://www.lexico.com/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&filter=dictionary&dictionary=en&query=inversed https://de.pons.com/%C3%BCbersetzung/englisch-deutsch/inversed https://dictionary.cambridge.org/spellcheck/english-german/?q=inversed https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/inverse#Verb mentions "inverse" as a verb having "inversed" as past participle. Having said this I think (independent of the question if "inversed" exists) using two similar terms for the same thing just results in confusion. I hit that in the past already and I like it being addressed. > And as you noted in the cover letter, there's a conflict between the > macro defined in dt-bindings/pwm/pwm.txt. If they end up being included > in the wrong order you'll get a compile error. There are also other symbols that exist twice (GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH was the first to come to my mind). I'm not aware of any problems related to these. What am I missing? > The enum was named this way on purpose to make it separate from the > definition for the DT bindings. Then please let's make it different by picking a different prefix or something like that. > Note that DT bindings are an ABI and can > never change, whereas the enum pwm_polarity is part of a Linux internal > API and doesn't have the same restrictions as an ABI. I thought only binary device trees (dtb) are supposed to be ABI. Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |