Hello Geert,
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 10:44:50AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 10:15 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 09:59:04AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 9:39 AM, Uwe
Hello Geert,
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 10:44:50AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 10:15 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 09:59:04AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 9:39 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
> >> wrote:
> >> > On
Hi Uwe,
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 10:15 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 09:59:04AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 9:39 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
>> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at
Hi Uwe,
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 10:15 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 09:59:04AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 9:39 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
>> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 09:29:02AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> >> On Fri, Mar 24,
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 09:59:04AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Uwe,
>
> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 9:39 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 09:29:02AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 9:00 AM, Uwe
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 09:59:04AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Uwe,
>
> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 9:39 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 09:29:02AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 9:00 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
> >> wrote:
> >> > From:
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 8:10 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 08:44:41AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 07:43:25AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>> > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 02:41:53PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
>> >
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 8:10 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 08:44:41AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 07:43:25AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>> > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 02:41:53PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
>> > > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 1:34
Hi Uwe,
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 9:39 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 09:29:02AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 9:00 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
>> wrote:
>> > From: Uwe Kleine-König
Hi Uwe,
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 9:39 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 09:29:02AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 9:00 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
>> wrote:
>> > From: Uwe Kleine-König
>> > Subject: [PATCH] gpiod: let get_optional return NULL in some
Hello Geert,
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 09:29:02AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 9:00 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
> wrote:
> > From: Uwe Kleine-König
> > Subject: [PATCH] gpiod: let get_optional return NULL in
Hello Geert,
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 09:29:02AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 9:00 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
> wrote:
> > From: Uwe Kleine-König
> > Subject: [PATCH] gpiod: let get_optional return NULL in some cases with
> > GPIOLIB disabled
> >
> > People disagree if
Hi Uwe,
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 9:00 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> From: Uwe Kleine-König
> Subject: [PATCH] gpiod: let get_optional return NULL in some cases with
> GPIOLIB disabled
>
> People disagree if gpiod_get_optional
Hi Uwe,
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 9:00 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> From: Uwe Kleine-König
> Subject: [PATCH] gpiod: let get_optional return NULL in some cases with
> GPIOLIB disabled
>
> People disagree if gpiod_get_optional should return NULL or
> ERR_PTR(-ENOSYS) if GPIOLIB is disabled. The
Hello Dmitry,
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 12:58:04PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 08:10:20PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 08:44:41AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 07:43:25AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > > On
Hello Dmitry,
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 12:58:04PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 08:10:20PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 08:44:41AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 07:43:25AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > > On
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 08:10:20PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 08:44:41AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 07:43:25AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 02:41:53PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Mar 23,
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 08:10:20PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 08:44:41AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 07:43:25AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 02:41:53PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Mar 23,
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 08:44:41AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 07:43:25AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 02:41:53PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
> > >
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 08:44:41AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 07:43:25AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 02:41:53PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Maybe we can
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 12:11:06PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 11:20:39AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > But having the error breaks setups where the GPIO is optional and does
> > not exist.
>
> so the right way forward is to check harder in the
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 12:11:06PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 11:20:39AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > But having the error breaks setups where the GPIO is optional and does
> > not exist.
>
> so the right way forward is to check harder in the
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 07:43:25AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 02:41:53PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Maybe we can make gpiod_get_optional look like this:
> > >
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 07:43:25AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 02:41:53PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Maybe we can make gpiod_get_optional look like this:
> > >
> > > if (!dev->of_node
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 02:41:53PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
> wrote:
>
> > Maybe we can make gpiod_get_optional look like this:
> >
> > if (!dev->of_node && isnt_a_acpi_device(dev) &&
> >
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 02:41:53PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
> wrote:
>
> > Maybe we can make gpiod_get_optional look like this:
> >
> > if (!dev->of_node && isnt_a_acpi_device(dev) &&
> > !IS_ENABLED(GPIOLIB))
> >
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> Maybe we can make gpiod_get_optional look like this:
>
> if (!dev->of_node && isnt_a_acpi_device(dev) && !IS_ENABLED(GPIOLIB))
> return NULL;
> else
> return
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> Maybe we can make gpiod_get_optional look like this:
>
> if (!dev->of_node && isnt_a_acpi_device(dev) && !IS_ENABLED(GPIOLIB))
> return NULL;
> else
> return -ENOSYS;
>
> I don't know how
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 11:10 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> So you exchanged many obvious and easy to fix problems with a few hard
> ones. I don't agree that's a good idea, but you seem to be willing to
> try it. Good luck.
I think instead of going to sarcastic
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 11:10 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> So you exchanged many obvious and easy to fix problems with a few hard
> ones. I don't agree that's a good idea, but you seem to be willing to
> try it. Good luck.
I think instead of going to sarcastic remarks you can say you NACK the
Hi Uwe,
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 01:03:56PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
>> wrote:
>> >> Make sure to enable all
Hi Uwe,
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 01:03:56PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
>> wrote:
>> >> Make sure to enable all drivers and subsystems you need when building
>> >> your kernel.
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 01:03:56PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Uwe,
>
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
> wrote:
> >> Make sure to enable all drivers and subsystems you need when building
> >> your kernel. That's always true. And may
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 01:03:56PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Uwe,
>
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
> wrote:
> >> Make sure to enable all drivers and subsystems you need when building
> >> your kernel. That's always true. And may indeed be hard to debug (e.g.
Hi Uwe,
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
>> Make sure to enable all drivers and subsystems you need when building
>> your kernel. That's always true. And may indeed be hard to debug (e.g. what
>> kernel options do I need to make systemd
Hi Uwe,
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
>> Make sure to enable all drivers and subsystems you need when building
>> your kernel. That's always true. And may indeed be hard to debug (e.g. what
>> kernel options do I need to make systemd work?).
>
> It's worse here. If
Hello,
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 11:20:39AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> But having the error breaks setups where the GPIO is optional and does
> not exist.
so the right way forward is to check harder in the situation where
-ENOSYS was returned before to determine if there is really no GPIO
Hello,
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 11:20:39AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> But having the error breaks setups where the GPIO is optional and does
> not exist.
so the right way forward is to check harder in the situation where
-ENOSYS was returned before to determine if there is really no GPIO
Hi Uwe,
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 11:10 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 10:32:01AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at
Hi Uwe,
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 11:10 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 10:32:01AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:38:52AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> >> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 10:32:01AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
> wrote:
> > Hello Geert,
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:38:52AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:31 AM, Uwe
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 10:32:01AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
> wrote:
> > Hello Geert,
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:38:52AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:31 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
> >> wrote:
> >> > On
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> Hello Geert,
>
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:38:52AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:31 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Mar 20,
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> Hello Geert,
>
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:38:52AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:31 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 10:56:14AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> >>
Hello Geert,
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:38:52AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:31 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 10:56:14AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >> Documentation/gpio/consumer.txt rightfully
Hello Geert,
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:38:52AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:31 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 10:56:14AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >> Documentation/gpio/consumer.txt rightfully sates:
> >> | Note that
Hi Uwe,
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:31 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 10:56:14AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> Documentation/gpio/consumer.txt rightfully sates:
>> | Note that gpio_get*_optional() functions (and their managed variants),
Hi Uwe,
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:31 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 10:56:14AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> Documentation/gpio/consumer.txt rightfully sates:
>> | Note that gpio_get*_optional() functions (and their managed variants),
>> unlike
>> | the rest of
Hello Geert,
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 10:56:14AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Documentation/gpio/consumer.txt rightfully sates:
> | Note that gpio_get*_optional() functions (and their managed variants),
> unlike
> | the rest of gpiolib API, also return NULL when gpiolib support is disabled.
Hello Geert,
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 10:56:14AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Documentation/gpio/consumer.txt rightfully sates:
> | Note that gpio_get*_optional() functions (and their managed variants),
> unlike
> | the rest of gpiolib API, also return NULL when gpiolib support is disabled.
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 10:56 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven
wrote:
> drivers/tty/serial/serial_mctrl_gpio.o already compiles fine if
> CONFIG_GPIOLIB=n, which reduces its size by ca. 25%.
That is: after removing the #ifdef and dummies in serial_mctrl_gpio.h
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 10:56 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven
wrote:
> drivers/tty/serial/serial_mctrl_gpio.o already compiles fine if
> CONFIG_GPIOLIB=n, which reduces its size by ca. 25%.
That is: after removing the #ifdef and dummies in serial_mctrl_gpio.h
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Hi Linus,
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 5:38 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven
wrote:
>> They actually all even do things like this in Kconfig:
>>
>> config SERIAL_ATMEL
>> (...)
>> select SERIAL_MCTRL_GPIO if GPIOLIB
>>
>> What stops us from removing all the stubs in
>>
Hi Linus,
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 5:38 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven
wrote:
>> They actually all even do things like this in Kconfig:
>>
>> config SERIAL_ATMEL
>> (...)
>> select SERIAL_MCTRL_GPIO if GPIOLIB
>>
>> What stops us from removing all the stubs in
>>
Hi Linus,
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 10:53:27AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Uwe
Hi Linus,
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 10:53:27AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
>>> > I wouldn't want to code this in each
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 04:18:52PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 10:53:27AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
>
> >> > I
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 04:18:52PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 10:53:27AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
>
> >> > I wouldn't want to code this in each
On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 10:53:27AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
>> > I wouldn't want to code this in each driver (something like:
>> >
>> >
On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 10:53:27AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
>> > I wouldn't want to code this in each driver (something like:
>> >
>> > if (IS_ENABLED(GPIOLIB) ||
On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
>> Anyway, for sh-sci.c, platforms either have DT and GPIOLIB, or they do not
>> need mctrl-gpio.
>
> So we're in agreement now that HALFGPIOLIB is the way to go?
> Linus, what do you think?
I'm too swamped
On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
>> Anyway, for sh-sci.c, platforms either have DT and GPIOLIB, or they do not
>> need mctrl-gpio.
>
> So we're in agreement now that HALFGPIOLIB is the way to go?
> Linus, what do you think?
I'm too swamped in mail and work to figure this
Hi Uwe,
On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 10:09:50AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 9:58 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at
Hi Uwe,
On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 10:09:50AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 9:58 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 09:49:39AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> >> > Given that
Cc += LinusW
On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 10:53:27AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 10:09:50AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 9:58 AM, Uwe
Cc += LinusW
On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 10:53:27AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 10:09:50AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 9:58 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Mon,
Hello Geert,
On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 10:09:50AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 9:58 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 09:49:39AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >> > Given that mctrl-gpio can be useful on
Hello Geert,
On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 10:09:50AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 9:58 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 09:49:39AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >> > Given that mctrl-gpio can be useful on legacy platforms, a device could
> >>
Hi Uwe,
On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 9:58 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 09:49:39AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> > Given that mctrl-gpio can be useful on legacy platforms, a device could
>> > silently run without cts-gpio even there.
>>
>>
Hi Uwe,
On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 9:58 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 09:49:39AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> > Given that mctrl-gpio can be useful on legacy platforms, a device could
>> > silently run without cts-gpio even there.
>>
>> On platforms were
Hello Geert,
On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 09:49:39AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > Given that mctrl-gpio can be useful on legacy platforms, a device could
> > silently run without cts-gpio even there.
>
> On platforms were CONFIG_GPIOLIB=n, this is not true, so the issue is moot.
>
> All
Hello Geert,
On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 09:49:39AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > Given that mctrl-gpio can be useful on legacy platforms, a device could
> > silently run without cts-gpio even there.
>
> On platforms were CONFIG_GPIOLIB=n, this is not true, so the issue is moot.
>
> All
Hi Uwe,
On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 6:48 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> Cc += linux-g...@vger.kernel.org
>
> On Sat, Mar 04, 2017 at 04:35:46PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 8:44 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
>>
Hi Uwe,
On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 6:48 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> Cc += linux-g...@vger.kernel.org
>
> On Sat, Mar 04, 2017 at 04:35:46PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 8:44 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
>> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Mar 03, 2017 at 08:21:05PM +0100, Geert
Hello,
Cc += linux-g...@vger.kernel.org
On Sat, Mar 04, 2017 at 04:35:46PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 8:44 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 03, 2017 at 08:21:05PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >> > diff --git
Hello,
Cc += linux-g...@vger.kernel.org
On Sat, Mar 04, 2017 at 04:35:46PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 8:44 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 03, 2017 at 08:21:05PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >> > diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/sh-sci.c
Hi Uwe,
On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 8:44 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 03, 2017 at 08:21:05PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> > diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/sh-sci.c b/drivers/tty/serial/sh-sci.c
>> > index 91e7dddbf72c..2f4cdd4e7b4f 100644
>> > ---
Hi Uwe,
On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 8:44 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 03, 2017 at 08:21:05PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> > diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/sh-sci.c b/drivers/tty/serial/sh-sci.c
>> > index 91e7dddbf72c..2f4cdd4e7b4f 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/tty/serial/sh-sci.c
>>
Hello Geert,
On Fri, Mar 03, 2017 at 08:21:05PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/sh-sci.c b/drivers/tty/serial/sh-sci.c
> > index 91e7dddbf72c..2f4cdd4e7b4f 100644
> > --- a/drivers/tty/serial/sh-sci.c
> > +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/sh-sci.c
> > @@ -3022,7
Hello Geert,
On Fri, Mar 03, 2017 at 08:21:05PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/sh-sci.c b/drivers/tty/serial/sh-sci.c
> > index 91e7dddbf72c..2f4cdd4e7b4f 100644
> > --- a/drivers/tty/serial/sh-sci.c
> > +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/sh-sci.c
> > @@ -3022,7
Hi Uwe,
On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 8:12 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 03, 2017 at 07:58:36PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 3:22 PM, Richard Genoud
>> wrote:
>> > Since commit 1d267ea6539f ("serial:
Hi Uwe,
On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 8:12 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 03, 2017 at 07:58:36PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 3:22 PM, Richard Genoud
>> wrote:
>> > Since commit 1d267ea6539f ("serial: mctrl-gpio: simplify init routine"),
>> > the
On Fri, Mar 03, 2017 at 07:58:36PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 3:22 PM, Richard Genoud
> wrote:
> > Since commit 1d267ea6539f ("serial: mctrl-gpio: simplify init routine"),
> > the mctrl_gpio_to_gpiod() function can't
On Fri, Mar 03, 2017 at 07:58:36PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 3:22 PM, Richard Genoud
> wrote:
> > Since commit 1d267ea6539f ("serial: mctrl-gpio: simplify init routine"),
> > the mctrl_gpio_to_gpiod() function can't return an error anymore.
> >
Hi Richard,
On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 3:22 PM, Richard Genoud wrote:
> Since commit 1d267ea6539f ("serial: mctrl-gpio: simplify init routine"),
> the mctrl_gpio_to_gpiod() function can't return an error anymore.
> So, just testing for a NULL pointer is ok.
If
Hi Richard,
On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 3:22 PM, Richard Genoud wrote:
> Since commit 1d267ea6539f ("serial: mctrl-gpio: simplify init routine"),
> the mctrl_gpio_to_gpiod() function can't return an error anymore.
> So, just testing for a NULL pointer is ok.
If CONFIG_GPIOLIB=n,
Since commit 1d267ea6539f ("serial: mctrl-gpio: simplify init routine"),
the mctrl_gpio_to_gpiod() function can't return an error anymore.
So, just testing for a NULL pointer is ok.
Signed-off-by: Richard Genoud
---
drivers/tty/serial/sh-sci.c | 12 +---
1 file
Since commit 1d267ea6539f ("serial: mctrl-gpio: simplify init routine"),
the mctrl_gpio_to_gpiod() function can't return an error anymore.
So, just testing for a NULL pointer is ok.
Signed-off-by: Richard Genoud
---
drivers/tty/serial/sh-sci.c | 12 +---
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+),
88 matches
Mail list logo