The comment introduced with the recently added pinctrl_gpio_range.pins
element was wrong. This corrects it.
Thanks to Patrice Chotard for pointing this out.
Signed-off-by: Christian Ruppert <christian.rupp...@abilis.com>
---
include/linux/pinctrl/pinctrl.h | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/pinctrl/pinctrl.h b/include/linux/pinctrl/pinctrl.h
index 286c5e5..47ab2fb 100644
--- a/include/linux/pinctrl/pinctrl.h
+++ b/include/linux/pinctrl/pinctrl.h
@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ struct pinctrl_pin_desc {
* @name: a name for the chip in this range
* @id: an ID number for the chip in this range
* @base: base offset of the GPIO range
- * @pin_base: base pin number of the GPIO range if pins != NULL
+ * @pin_base: base pin number of the GPIO range if pins == NULL
* @pins: enumeration of pins in GPIO range or NULL
* @npins: number of pins in the GPIO range, including the base number
* @gc: an optional pointer to a gpio_chip
--
1.7.1
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
