From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 495D1C43460 for ; Fri, 21 May 2021 11:20:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A03D61175 for ; Fri, 21 May 2021 11:20:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234578AbhEULVf (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 May 2021 07:21:35 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:55150 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231135AbhEULVa (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 May 2021 07:21:30 -0400 Received: from mail-pg1-x52d.google.com (mail-pg1-x52d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52d]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6F149C061574; Fri, 21 May 2021 04:20:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg1-x52d.google.com with SMTP id q15so13952123pgg.12; Fri, 21 May 2021 04:20:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=0IfFZW3XDMadLNY3MLRNLu8CWZ0fRKcfHiK2HF4n6II=; b=cuX/pMf/TfRY5jXrbtMY6sRZQU1YF5AqJRryqp9ImAd9ME3VSkmy6xjW3STSABikMI KaT0e49wTS6TqfHFvkDU5b/pqL6uDCC2JCjLZhdRLlV6p503eba0vus/l9A6d4wASGEc HLABRXWpuf4ch/J1a9s+hbdgwS1o38yujk/eV/Zend8I4dCRw1NS2Oe2Bpf0AMIeFXbd uaugNROBoy0ikLwas46KVd96HwZ4r8j43anjbMDxz0kyRb0rlv9vbOibOGtf9OoleWle sB3x87bfwb9dYqwAVWJuCnJc+vGY0l2cU11wnC+mGk1b/W0YxaRmdD33pQXMpd7Bs103 PfFg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=0IfFZW3XDMadLNY3MLRNLu8CWZ0fRKcfHiK2HF4n6II=; b=eKIQnu/xbBmUoXt5vtFyPKs6sLgzARKk4KtoVKpIDitSxbqCuF+DEcTi+kFbXgNJdw dwsNyH5ara5QWUjJ3mWCd9kOARStP8leWJNVcB/zxEqIpmgqdPCuyctoZDGbCk0ikYaJ TVzOfgxouCKxetEm0D6JXDEnsAIkLrHVND0UgDeuVtRivLecLIDHHgq10dorxSWIn8am 4Xws1sBhnwQPE2KTcpkPKZU80gpbAuD+bzYmg27B0+PM6JtB1b6fGCABriBFKjbUzHsj 5BwAWWD1wSjyf8TYxA71FKPOqSGdgQK7YtzrAW5nT/UUTm3W0XGn8ly6jdHRIk8gnYQ9 fv2g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531O0d7ArLEveQPGzhjO5cd0cuE1wN0pknqc6rUSA+WhPdHeH3hA Cv5zvU2kvgq4UbN9uDFGRQYFUnD4OPQRKcD7Xtc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxsgvEGgiJjzzvGasTMF74DBKT73SOPAMMu/rbdDiH/eZygX1O8t5oja4b9vvphcE8fbwelCK1ykkJVYutw3aY= X-Received: by 2002:a63:cd11:: with SMTP id i17mr9415037pgg.74.1621596006002; Fri, 21 May 2021 04:20:06 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <6e319c22b41747e3911c7a5cad877134cabc9231.1621577204.git.matti.vaittinen@fi.rohmeurope.com> <8c048bda0ace591d7e91c07ed9155338@walle.cc> In-Reply-To: <8c048bda0ace591d7e91c07ed9155338@walle.cc> From: Andy Shevchenko Date: Fri, 21 May 2021 14:19:49 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] gpio: regmap: Support few IC specific operations To: Michael Walle Cc: Matti Vaittinen , Matti Vaittinen , Linus Walleij , Bartosz Golaszewski , "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-power Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 1:19 PM Michael Walle wrote: > > Am 2021-05-21 12:09, schrieb Andy Shevchenko: > > On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 12:53 PM Matti Vaittinen > > wrote: > >> Changelog v2: (based on suggestions by Michael Walle) > >> - drop gpio_regmap_set_drvdata() > > > > But why do we have gpio_regmap_get_drvdata() and why is it different > > now to the new member handling? > > Eg. the reg_mask_xlate() callback is just passed a "struct > gpio_regmap*". > If someone needs to access private data there, gpio_regmap_get_drvdata() > is used. At least that was its intention. > > Thus I was also suggesting to use "struct gpio_regmap*" in the newer > callbacks. > > I don't get what you mean by "different to the new member handling"? Currently we have a symmetrical API that is getter and setter against a certain field. Now this change drops the setter and introduces some other field somewhere else. Sounds to me: - either this has to be split into two changes with explanation of what's going on - or something odd is happening here which I do not understand. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko