From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S966381Ab2ERAKt (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 May 2012 20:10:49 -0400 Received: from mail-pb0-f46.google.com ([209.85.160.46]:57658 "EHLO mail-pb0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965781Ab2ERAKr (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 May 2012 20:10:47 -0400 From: Grant Likely Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] gpiolib: Implement devm_gpio_request_one() To: Mark Brown , Linus Walleij Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20120512190501.GB11435@sirena.org.uk> References: <1335959206-8138-1-git-send-email-broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <1335959206-8138-2-git-send-email-broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <20120512190501.GB11435@sirena.org.uk> Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 18:10:45 -0600 Message-Id: <20120518001045.259CA3E062C@localhost> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 12 May 2012 20:05:02 +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, May 02, 2012 at 12:46:46PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > Allow drivers to use the modern request and configure idiom together > > with devres. > > > As with plain gpio_request() and gpio_request_one() we can't implement > > the old school version in terms of _one() as this would force the > > explicit selection of a direction in gpio_request() which could break > > systems if we pick the wrong one. Implementing devm_gpio_request_one() > > in terms of devm_gpio_request() would needlessly complicate things or > > lead to duplication from the unmanaged version depending on how it's > > done. > > > > Signed-off-by: Mark Brown > > Any chance we can get this into 3.5? Writing error handling code is > boring :) Applied, thanks. I'll push it out this evening. g. -- Grant Likely, B.Sc, P.Eng. Secret Lab Technologies, Ltd.