[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75Vf9Sw63tGbdv2X+fqcsBzi=6vbfPOvfPHcBi2WcC5R6Rg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 20:08:15 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>,
"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] ACPI / gpio: Add support for naming GPIOs
On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 6:01 PM, Mika Westerberg
<mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com> 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
>> <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com> 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists