netdev - Re: [PATCH v5 4/4] mdio-mux-gpio: use new gpiod_get_array and gpiod_put

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 5 Mar 2015 10:04:20 +0100
From:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:	Rojhalat Ibrahim <imr@...chenk.de>
Cc:	Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>,
	"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
	Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@...dia.com>,
	Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/4] mdio-mux-gpio: use new gpiod_get_array and
 gpiod_put_array functions

On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 3:33 PM, Rojhalat Ibrahim <imr@...chenk.de> wrote:

> And the interface as proposed in this series is very convenient for obtaining
> all the GPIOs belonging to a group with a single function call and without
> having to know the number of GPIOs within the group beforehand.
>
> So if we want to support different use cases, I think it's quite good as it is.
> People who want to set a group of GPIOs as obtained by gpiod_get_array() can
> do so with a single call to gpiod_set_array(), the only overhead being that
> they have to specify the two elements of struct gpiod_descs explicitly.
> Likewise people who want to set a group of GPIOs obtained with a combination
> of calls to gpiod_get_array() and gpiod_get() can do so too. They just have
> to create that group first.
>
> On the other hand if gpiod_set_array() would require a struct gpiod_descs as
> argument the creation of a group for the second use case would become more
> complicated as you would have to allocate a struct instead of an array, etc.
>
> So let's just keep it the way it is and get this series merged.

I've merged it.

But can you make a separate patch to Documentation/gpio/consumer.txt
describing the array usecase(s) a bit in detail so people realize when it's
good to use these functions?

> About the confusing function names: I would be happy to submit a patch
> renaming gpiod_set_array() to gpiod_set_array_value(), once this has been
> merged. I'm a little concerned about the length of some function names though.
> Isn't gpiod_set_raw_array_value_cansleep() a bit long?

Just patch it and we'll discuss it... :)

Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html