Messages in this thread | | | From | Andy Shevchenko <> | Date | Fri, 21 May 2021 14:19:49 +0300 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] gpio: regmap: Support few IC specific operations |
| |
On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 1:19 PM Michael Walle <michael@walle.cc> wrote: > > Am 2021-05-21 12:09, schrieb Andy Shevchenko: > > On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 12:53 PM Matti Vaittinen > > <matti.vaittinen@fi.rohmeurope.com> 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
| |