Re: [PATCH 2/2] gpiolib: rename gpio_chip_hwgpio() for consistency

[Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>]

On Tue, Sep 05, 2023 at 01:26:34PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 5, 2023 at 12:34 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 05, 2023 at 10:37:32AM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 11:27 AM Andy Shevchenko
> > > <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Sep 04, 2023 at 09:34:10AM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > > > > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
> > > > >
> > > > > All other functions that manipulate a struct gpio_desc use the gpiod_
> > > > > prefix. Follow this convention and rename gpio_chip_hwgpio() to
> > > > > gpiod_get_hwgpio().
> > > >
> > > > Same comment. Also, I don't think it's good idea as it steps on the exported
> > > > API's toes. I.o.w. I won't mix those two.
> > >
> > > Even if I agreed with your other comment, gpio_chip_hwgpio() is a
> > > terrible name and if I didn't know, I couldn't tell you what it does
> > > just from looking at the name.
> >
> > That's can be improved, my previous comments were basically to avoid
> > mixing prefixes for internal and external APIs, let's say prefix them
> > similarly, but for internal with space and/or more verbose naming
> >
> >         gpiod_          gpio_desc_
> >         gpiochip_       gpio_chip_
> >         gdev_           gpio_device_
> 
> There's one more possibility. Have all exported symbols be prefixed
> with gpiod in one way or another and the internal symbols just drop
> the prefix so it would be like:
> 
> gpiod_
> gpiochip_
> gpio_device_
> 
> and
> 
> desc_
> chip_
> device_
> 
> Because for internal symbols we already know they refer to gpiolib.

With the above schema we have two caveats, one is not significant
(as we have desc_to_gpio() and complimentary API). And another one
is device/dev, which is conflicting with global. That's why I still
prefer gpio_desc_ and so on.

> Anyway, I'll drop the patches for now and let's revisit in the future
> when the consensus is reached.

Yes, let's focus on something more important now.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko