From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thierry Reding Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] leds: leds-pwm: Convert to use devm_get_pwm Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 11:00:32 +0100 Message-ID: <20121211100032.GA8907@avionic-0098.adnet.avionic-design.de> References: <1355133637-2784-1-git-send-email-peter.ujfalusi@ti.com> <3193669.Hv54bBklsP@barack> <20121211083632.GC27084@avionic-0098.adnet.avionic-design.de> <1406670.ryvqfkiNXS@barack> <20121211093100.GA8437@avionic-0098.adnet.avionic-design.de> <50C6FF69.3030001@ti.com> <20121211094812.GA22222@avionic-0098.adnet.avionic-design.de> <50C70287.1060006@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="zhXaljGHf11kAtnf" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <50C70287.1060006@ti.com> Sender: linux-doc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Peter Ujfalusi Cc: Bryan Wu , Richard Purdie , Grant Likely , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-leds@vger.kernel.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org --zhXaljGHf11kAtnf Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 10:53:11AM +0100, Peter Ujfalusi wrote: > On 12/11/2012 10:48 AM, Thierry Reding wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 10:39:53AM +0100, Peter Ujfalusi wrote: > >> On 12/11/2012 10:31 AM, Thierry Reding wrote: > >>> On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 09:57:51AM +0100, Peter Ujfalusi wrote: > >>> Okay, if there are no intree users that may be broken, then it should= be > >>> fine to remove it. In that case you might want to remove the pwm_id > >>> field as well instead of deprecating it in this patch. > >> > >> The reason I marked the pwm_id as deprecated is to signal to out of tr= ee users > >> (if any) that they should stop using it since it is going to go away i= n the > >> next cycle. > >> If we remove it right away the sdp4030 board file will not going to co= mpile in > >> subsystem trees, only in linux-next. > >=20 > > Okay, go ahead then. As long as the field will be removed eventually > > that's fine with me. >=20 > Thank you and yes, it will be removed. >=20 > Probably it would be a good thing to check other places for legacy > pwm_request() users and prepare them to move to (devm_)pwm_get gracefully= over > coming kernel releases. Yes, I have a local patch that deprecates pwm_request() and pwm_free() to make it easy to spot them (though git grep does a better job actually as it doesn't require compilation). I originally planned to replace all pwm_request()/pwm_free() usage by pwm_get()/pwm_put() already for 3.8 but got side-tracked with other stuff but I hope I can make it for 3.9. If that works out we could remove pwm_request() and pwm_free() completely for 3.10. Thierry --zhXaljGHf11kAtnf Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJQxwRAAAoJEN0jrNd/PrOhAgUQAJGP29h4E13zOyQDgnvS/azA /B8wCXN4hr9TkFDJOK7X8bt/Cq/u3ALHqCQKLzl8RxS293vsra50pBk7LOHoBGTR +pqnIKoWU/fqZrGaGKN+FNPXmBskpL9cpbc9gSDe4Y2DffOAbZKdbKh8cOgO5NCD 0qxLFr1mdsTKu+3/yhx714Kt5Ki16WB+3oIctEswyP7/tvxMyECx/88TImQjT3DH VzY2DdlUwt7Xq36iLx9QJUS182fgfFI2g6N921QQoxY77/thOkgaYIlG1BhKoATl 7/8fa5KrR3KEBbmnnA4AD/kzc4IlfFMTkpJQd2ZnwJCeMahtABbfLPZsO2Namuc6 O1bP8xb4XohhwrG/Th4JkshqDI999y/sgPpw85WFrdFlKKogNodz1radaCtPY3Yl w1478QG6qExWlL8Aaxc/OHBbUv6hKwV/S50928afl3xDVcYuLm+Vhm9L86IMGNEo 61A9aesoVa3Oyu6wYuBVrgDi/j/m/tAagAgohv2iRvehdOAJ0rRpkvfb9pHHBY9K 7aotIWW9nLIs2rKcyc1vcO/hfmzKiBZewWrjZh5PJfq7rqwWtSfJA0v4jWLWboVh rrKYMjIVbWLHDkf9ifpfVgW9dn8wUMhgm6LRSVP1IYcWh2KwQrh4x027dYPVFBEL sAUV2/zm7VcDPZgmyHmo =7MQE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --zhXaljGHf11kAtnf--