Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] ASoC: rt5645: change gpio to gpiod APIs

[Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>]

On 06/03/2015 02:03 PM, Bard Liao wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Mark Brown [mailto:broonie@kernel.org]
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2015 1:17 AM
>> To: Lars-Peter Clausen
>> Cc: Bard Liao; lgirdwood@gmail.com; Oder Chiou;
>> alsa-devel@alsa-project.org; zhengxing@rock-chips.com;
>> yang.a.fang@intel.com; koro.chen@mediatek.com; John Lin;
>> Leilk.Liu@mediatek.com; Flove
>> Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH v2 1/2] ASoC: rt5645: change gpio to
>> gpiod APIs
>>
>> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 06:31:08PM +0200, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
>>
>>> Three things, don't use the _index API if there is only a single gpio
>>> for the property, either don't use a name at all or use a descriptive
>>> name something like "hp-detect" and use the new version of the API
>>> which has the flags parameter.
>>
>>> So this should be: devm_gpiod_get(&i2c->dev, NULL, GPIOD_IN);
>>
>>> and then drop the gpiod_direction_input()...
>>
>> It seems better if people use names where possible if there's any chance
>> that we could add support for other GPIOs in the future, that avoids
>> confusion further down the line with extension.
>
> Do you mean use a well-described gpio name such as "hp-detect" so that
> we can use another name if we need to add other gpios in the future?

Yes, kind of. The name of the GPIO should be its function. Having a GPIO 
with the name rt5645 on a rt5645 does not really describe anything since we 
already know that it is a rt5645.