[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACRpkda8mL9DGenPaGtXEiK9v4-pWo_kA5khK6Mk0i5i5fs1SA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2021 01:03:40 +0100
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>
Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/8] gpiolib: remove legacy gpio_export
On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 11:47 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org> wrote:
> v3.18 676
> v4.1 669
> v4.4 646
> v4.9 639
> v4.14 614
> v4.19 553
> v5.4 465
> v5.10 381
> v5.15 354
Hey :D I didn't know it was working out that well. OK this give me hope!
> I've also started a patch series to remove some of the less common
> of_gpio portions, which gets rid of of_get_gpio(), of_get_gpio_flags()
> and of_get_named_gpio_flags() but leaves of_get_named_gpio() in
> place for now. I'm much less confident about that work though, so I
> haven't posted that. I think killing off the of_gpio consumer-side
> interfaces entirely would likely make the biggest impact, as those
> appear to still be used a lot in relatively modern drivers, while the
> traditional gpio_request() interfaces are mainly used in drivers for
> legacy boards that don't have a long future ahead of them unless
> they get converted to DT.
OK you got a point. I am running around in SA1100 systems and
stuff like that :/ getting rid of of_gpio.h would be a real nice feat.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
Powered by blists - more mailing lists