[linux-nfc] Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3] nfc: s3fwrn5: use signed integer for parsing GPIO numbers

[linux-nfc] Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3] nfc: s3fwrn5: use signed integer for parsing GPIO numbers

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 643 bytes --]

On Fri, Nov 27, 2020@12:33:37AM +0900, bongsu.jeon2@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
> 
> GPIOs - as returned by of_get_named_gpio() and used by the gpiolib - are
> signed integers, where negative number indicates error.  The return
> value of of_get_named_gpio() should not be assigned to an unsigned int
> because in case of !CONFIG_GPIOLIB such number would be a valid GPIO.
> 
> Fixes: c04c674fadeb ("nfc: s3fwrn5: Add driver for Samsung S3FWRN5 NFC Chip")
> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>

Why do you send my patch?

Best regards,
Krzysztof

[linux-nfc] Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3] nfc: s3fwrn5: use signed integer for parsing GPIO numbers

[Bongsu Jeon]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1144 bytes --]

On 11/27/20, Bongsu Jeon <bs.jeon87@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020@2:06 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020@12:33:37AM +0900, bongsu.jeon2@gmail.com wrote:
>> > From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
>> >
>> > GPIOs - as returned by of_get_named_gpio() and used by the gpiolib -
>> > are
>> > signed integers, where negative number indicates error.  The return
>> > value of of_get_named_gpio() should not be assigned to an unsigned int
>> > because in case of !CONFIG_GPIOLIB such number would be a valid GPIO.
>> >
>> > Fixes: c04c674fadeb ("nfc: s3fwrn5: Add driver for Samsung S3FWRN5 NFC
>> > Chip")
>> > Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
>> > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
>>
>> Why do you send my patch?
>>
>
> I think that your patch should be applied before refactoring for this
> driver.
> So, I applied your patch to net-next branch and included your patch at
> my patch list.
> Is this the wrong process?
>

Sorry to confuse you.
I found your patch when i updated my workspace using git pull.

>> Best regards,
>> Krzysztof
>