[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Zg1UJPhFnQoIfNBR@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2024 16:05:40 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Cc: linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Alex Shi <alexs@...nel.org>,
Yanteng Si <siyanteng@...ngson.cn>,
Hu Haowen <2023002089@...k.tyut.edu.cn>,
Daniel Mack <daniel@...que.org>,
Haojian Zhuang <haojian.zhuang@...il.com>,
Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@...e.fr>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/3] gpiolib: Get rid of
gpio_free_array()/gpio_request_array()
On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 01:09:13PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 8:43 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 03:49:02PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > There are only two users left of the gpio_free_array()/gpio_request_array().
> > > Convert them to very basic legacy APIs (it requires much less work for
> > > now) and drop no more used gpio_free_array()/gpio_request_array().
> >
> > Any comments on this? We really want to get rid of the legacy APIs.
>
> I applied the patches, they only touch the GPIO part in legacy
> platform code. It's not very controversial IMO.
Thank you!
FWIW, In case of issue(s) I would like to help to fix, but I don't think
it will be even one.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists