[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aYNXFdxZiO2TMwSy@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2026 16:26:29 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
To: Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linusw@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>,
Xianwei Zhao <xianwei.zhao@...ogic.com>,
Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>,
Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@...libre.com>,
Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com>,
linux-amlogic@...ts.infradead.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] pinctrl: pinconf-generic: move ..dt_node_to_map_pinmux()
to amlogic-am4 driver
On Wed, Feb 04, 2026 at 04:22:47PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 04, 2026 at 02:15:10PM +0000, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 04, 2026 at 09:05:34AM +0100, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 04, 2026 at 12:34:36AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Feb 3, 2026 at 5:17 PM Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org> wrote:
...
> > > Note, please, remove extra '.' (dot) in the Subject.o
> >
> > fwiw, the .. was intentional cos I was truncating the pinconf_generic
> > from the function since the subject was really long, not referring to
> > a member of an ops struct.
>
> Yes, and that's how we refer to the callbacks — with a single dot and parentheses:
>
> .my_cool_cb()
>
> Alternatively
>
> ->my_cool_cb()
>
> but it one character longer and TBH it slightly less readable (I personally
> used the latter and then switched to the former in the recent years).
Hmm... My memory tricked me, it seems I switched to ->cb() notation, at least
there are patches with that from October last year. Whatever, choose one and
use it :-)
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists