[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YoJbaTNJFV2A1Etw@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 17:10:49 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Cc: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...nel.org>,
Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>,
Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@...nsource.wdc.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
chris.packham@...iedtelesis.co.nz,
Sergey Shtylyov <s.shtylyov@....ru>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
linux-can@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Anatolij Gustschin <agust@...x.de>,
Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@...ndegger.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] powerpc/52xx: Convert to use fwnode API
On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 05:05:12PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 11:48:05PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> writes:
> > > We may convert the GPT driver to use fwnode API for the sake
> > > of consistency of the used APIs inside the driver.
> >
> > I'm not sure about this one.
> >
> > It's more consistent to use fwnode in this driver, but it's very
> > inconsistent with the rest of the powerpc code. We have basically no
> > uses of the fwnode APIs at the moment.
>
> Fair point!
>
> > It seems like a pretty straight-forward conversion, but there could
> > easily be a bug in there, I don't have any way to test it. Do you?
>
> Nope, only compile testing. The important part of this series is to
> clean up of_node from GPIO library, so since here it's a user of
> it I want to do that. This patch is just ad-hoc conversion that I
> noticed is possible. But there is no any requirement to do so.
>
> Lemme drop this from v3.
I just realize that there is no point to send a v3. You can just apply
first 3 patches. Or is your comment against entire series?
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists