From: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
To: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
Cc: Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@gmail.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
"linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio: return NULL from gpiod_get_optional when GPIOLIB is disabled
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2015 19:54:02 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150220185402.GQ19388@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150220053344.GA5518@dtor-glaptop>
Hello,
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 09:33:44PM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 01:59:43PM +0900, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 9:30 AM, Dmitry Torokhov
> > <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Given the intent behind gpiod_get_optional() and friends it does not make
> > > sense to return -ENOSYS when GPIOLIB is disabled: the driver is expected to
> > > work just fine without gpio so let's behave as if gpio was not found.
> > > Otherwise we have to special-case -ENOSYS in drivers.
> >
> > Interestingly Uwe sent a RFC for this one week ago:
> >
> > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/439135/
> >
> > Maybe credit him with a Suggested-by.?
>
> I certainly am fine with crediting him with Suggested-by even though I did not
> see that Uwe's e-mail but this patch was prompted by his other patch changing a
> few input drivers to use gpiod_get_optional() and me recalling that I
> explicitly did not use it as it made no difference from gpiod_get() since I had
> to handle -ENOSYS anyway.
Note that I'm not convinced any more this is a good idea. Consider you
have a device tree entry specifying
reset-gpio = <&gpio5 4 0>;
for your device.
With
gpiod_get_optional(dev, "reset", GPIO_OUT_LOW);
the drivers tells that some of the devices it can handle have a reset
gpio. If the device in question does have such a gpio the driver must
know and do something with it. If the device doesn't have such a gpio
that's fine, too.
But if GPIOLIB is off and the device has a reset-gpio specified you
certainly want to error out, right?
So IMHO the right thing to do is to return NULL iff there is no
reset-gpio specified. Otherwise -ENOSYS is the right thing to return.
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-20 18:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-20 0:30 [PATCH] gpio: return NULL from gpiod_get_optional when GPIOLIB is disabled Dmitry Torokhov
2015-02-20 4:59 ` Alexandre Courbot
2015-02-20 5:33 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2015-02-20 5:37 ` Alexandre Courbot
2015-02-20 18:54 ` Uwe Kleine-König [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150220185402.GQ19388@pengutronix.de \
--to=u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de \
--cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
--cc=gnurou@gmail.com \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).