[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <511C1990.1090205@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 09:54:08 +1100
From: Ryan Mallon <rmallon@...il.com>
To: Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>
CC: Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] gpiolib: rename local offset variables to "hwgpio"
On 13/02/13 18:03, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> From: Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@...dia.com>
>
> Their value being obtained by gpio_chip_hwgpio(), this better reflects
> their use.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@...dia.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 70 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------
> 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
> index d8aa1a0..42838c2 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
> @@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ struct gpio_desc {
> };
> static struct gpio_desc gpio_desc[ARCH_NR_GPIOS];
>
> -#define GPIO_OFFSET_VALID(chip, offset) (offset >= 0 && offset < chip->ngpio)
> +#define GPIO_HWNUM_VALID(chip, hwgpio) (hwgpio >= 0 && hwgpio < chip->ngpio)
Nitpicky - Is it accurate to call these hardware numbers? Don't some of
the platforms remap the gpio numbers? These numbers may not match
against the platform's datasheet for example.
~Ryan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists