[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170131010607.GC35974@dtor-ws>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2017 17:06:07 -0800
From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
To: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>,
linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
Bryan Wu <cooloney@...il.com>,
Richard Purdie <rpurdie@...ys.net>,
Jacek Anaszewski <j.anaszewski@...sung.com>,
linux-leds@...r.kernel.org, Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@...com>,
linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] gpio: Rename devm_get_gpiod_from_child()
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).
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?
Please, no.
Thanks.
--
Dmitry
Powered by blists - more mailing lists