From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8EA881F8BCB; Tue, 4 Mar 2025 09:18:08 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.13 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1741079890; cv=none; b=UBpjIYVjyJEf2SYXx7w4+BLrzUMzk52Gkqv66toG9Lb8Lr76wXFAxLQeGF4p7q2keUNLfyah5L/i8WuW8RCQVEMM7zbW6XzVn5vCFyzaqjMiioeRWyOHFFB2TpbYhdd6MfpZDfH/NHUNuQhcU7aj6xEoO3736e2+fRv0d0eVsuI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1741079890; c=relaxed/simple; bh=dEUuBGi+fZBZUh6pIwuiQnxwpPqstUiP3ToNVUPS6DQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Sz16/IK6UIciHEqvfv7njFEJI8eLO9j7SQVccox++MxQI7VlzHOUKcPnzfhjQIOEprZT6cjEa+vLk+mkt30rtUEnkKAD8j8saxlob+grmciox9x6282IFC7jFNt/vVWgDvboyFdGKPL+LqHnJEGPOC6WXDohSkMGrC9QVW82A9g= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=PiMN8go5; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.13 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="PiMN8go5" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1741079888; x=1772615888; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=dEUuBGi+fZBZUh6pIwuiQnxwpPqstUiP3ToNVUPS6DQ=; b=PiMN8go52f/t0VsJ+3GkYsalpQSGRsT5AA9rRquJ6/KkXVJ1I1mVm3wi yn/wQ27zSjA3cS4ljLQ03uPyjSHnF0seXev4dCNTvkaAQ6/n7gcscKHLO gaWeWmLttcWh40WRxQMGZ13yZLvHvWm/2xSOf1ZVZHBj2rlH1e+KbDsle 4b8IQYe5w+yjpKdjHv0z1N/zszsLqcwDq2rvHsg7kznAZB5X7Lh1+XbnR hFBOE8zclyFFi4Ux6M03/eub5WMSUEm5yv7z1Rz6891V9Fk8zI5ytedP8 hULbopeMuuXcjQzBYl9MbkrdaSFqEv+fEnkZi8Im+umuj472x6b3PDIHo g==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: GIg4hGR0S4eVD160iwBwMw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: mvXPCaPoShevwPf6gBPpWA== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11362"; a="52969271" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.13,331,1732608000"; d="scan'208";a="52969271" Received: from fmviesa005.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.145]) by orvoesa105.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 04 Mar 2025 01:18:08 -0800 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: lAVuN9O+Ty+1aYl+l0C4gw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: KsMe/U0oRPqD8PHR4rGjHw== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.13,331,1732608000"; d="scan'208";a="122937324" Received: from black.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.28]) by fmviesa005.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 04 Mar 2025 01:18:05 -0800 Received: by black.fi.intel.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 5512918F; Tue, 04 Mar 2025 11:18:04 +0200 (EET) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2025 11:18:04 +0200 From: Mika Westerberg To: Andy Shevchenko Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski , linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mika Westerberg , Linus Walleij , Bartosz Golaszewski , Kent Gibson Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] gpiolib: Rename gpio_set_debounce_timeout() to gpiod_do_set_debounce() Message-ID: <20250304091804.GG3713119@black.fi.intel.com> References: <20250303160341.1322640-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> <20250303160341.1322640-3-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250303160341.1322640-3-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> On Mon, Mar 03, 2025 at 06:00:33PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > In order to reduce the 'gpio' namespace when operate over GPIO descriptor > rename gpio_set_debounce_timeout() to gpiod_do_set_debounce(). To me anything that has '_do_' in their name sounds like an internal static function that gets wrapped by the actual API function(s). For instance it could be int gpio_set_debounce_timeout() { ... gpiod_do_set_debounce() ... However, gpiod_set_debounce_timeout() or gpiod_set_debounce() sounds good to me.