[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMRc=MeukM8-1P6t9LBgjs9VEQ8JhqNyUVAiZ1yaALsPSxSUTQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2021 10:02:18 +0100
From: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
To: Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
Alexander Dahl <ada@...rsis.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] gpiolib: allow line names from device props to
override driver names
On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 11:00 PM Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se> wrote:
>
> Some GPIO providers set names for GPIO lines that match the names of
> the pins on the SoC, or variations on that theme. These names are
> generic more often that not, such as pioC12 in the at91 case. These
> generic names block the possibility to set more useful GPIO line
> names with device properties (i.e. gpio-line-names).
>
> Allow overriding a generic name given by the GPIO driver if there is
> a name given to the GPIO line using device properties, but leave the
> generic name alone if no better name is available.
>
> However, there is a risk. If user space is depending on the above
> mentioned fixed GPIO names, AND there are device properties that
> previously did not reach the surface, the name change might cause
> regressions. But hopefully this stays below the radar...
>
> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
> Tested-by: Alexander Dahl <ada@...rsis.com>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>
> ---
Applied, thanks!
Bart
Powered by blists - more mailing lists