From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-io1-f43.google.com (mail-io1-f43.google.com [209.85.166.43]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9AC2020EE; Sun, 14 Jan 2024 12:55:25 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="FcFUiW5z" Received: by mail-io1-f43.google.com with SMTP id ca18e2360f4ac-7bf2a89c273so65744839f.3; Sun, 14 Jan 2024 04:55:25 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1705236924; x=1705841724; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=BxXhDrDTWUWugV/3PD/CLnM+3ZJaWXO6/qqmveyyw2s=; b=FcFUiW5zccsjxUI3rXkeUg/GI0Ir5sRHxTCDN6/V1py1FHfDyPGJUAo+Y4oV4Ltt85 BWoQ/X0XqJ9NYdypaHKxSHnXu8A+ZlBFDZ8kz+qnhgkwI78kLAhjxRlcmD68HRBLE1fO x45PeSKsEuRVkIG7y0qPAccUGqnhzJU6xHVcC+H0s4qerDvNDilAM8syJUhtLNTq/pPc VMYguCWNlvJ9y7KSMyI9CNdirC5QLt396lmyXpbe7o3LjB9ND2q6pj4y/Q5qavjC7SLH UKktZ6af890HelFJNiIXRohFlJBg0q82p9Hmk9KR0fvEPgdXrHzqqWKg/wBJSvkDortM ILDA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1705236924; x=1705841724; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=BxXhDrDTWUWugV/3PD/CLnM+3ZJaWXO6/qqmveyyw2s=; b=fkAHreBaRYdbWK/UGScCuJ9SZtG7Ebsh44GLokkLB7+V253c5XGiyKA4EfEo5Lu0s0 l29yTx7fAFaEnqNx1J3vgwZgpwqgpRyZePP39JW11pqIkguEnPkJxceFlejiTjq5PbD/ PLlp2sCgMSquqTR7xY6mSqOvIeImkrlFxy9Jns4l4bV4OqyUVSWTNywIv81HCMvFXtbV 85yWQLmAPPomOrhc5SgcDdPQfWmCx1cl6t1or/u326yoF+ZO43JOQldrX7Lhvhw7sTVS +11xl3RrMVNaqUbMiAUyy8x5q2mD1WSqa2+KTHNSu43BQQW+sMNUx53s62706ORcG7Cv O19A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxIS1A3E3CfoSrO/FpUKrRZz3liJjCGXyUowM9VfORnYo84wvJ9 Tc/BizLlyZ3qvDubq8zqhVg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEqA+EUhfPIJP6O62E5SzB1wSRXCemRkOGSmfdzDTcwYj6XTg/mhHVe2+m8V2ZtTJT0RHz9Fw== X-Received: by 2002:a6b:720d:0:b0:7be:e321:764 with SMTP id n13-20020a6b720d000000b007bee3210764mr6032344ioc.24.1705236924601; Sun, 14 Jan 2024 04:55:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from rigel (60-241-235-125.tpgi.com.au. [60.241.235.125]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z3-20020a170903018300b001c61073b076sm5985845plg.144.2024.01.14.04.55.20 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sun, 14 Jan 2024 04:55:24 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2024 20:55:18 +0800 From: Kent Gibson To: Andy Shevchenko Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, brgl@bgdev.pl, linus.walleij@linaro.org, andy@kernel.org, corbet@lwn.net Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] Documentation: gpio: add character device userspace API documentation Message-ID: <20240114125518.GA84351@rigel> References: <20240109135952.77458-1-warthog618@gmail.com> <20240114024724.GA20870@rigel> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: On Sun, Jan 14, 2024 at 02:01:29PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Sun, Jan 14, 2024 at 4:47 AM Kent Gibson wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 09, 2024 at 09:59:45PM +0800, Kent Gibson wrote: > > > My new year's resolution was to improve the documentation of the > > > character device API and gpio in general, so here we are. > > ... > > > While preparing the v2 version of this series, I'm now wondering > > if this should be changed to "obsolete" rather than "deprecated", to > > better fit with the interface lifecycle, to indicate there is an > > alternative, and to emphasise that it is scheduled for removal. > > i.e. from a userspace perspective "obsolete" is the clearer term. > > > > Is that a change worth making? > > From my p.o.v. yes, as it makes it consistent with what we already > have in the sysfs/obsolete. > Ok then, I'll incorporate it into v2. Cheers, Kent.