Nouveau - Aug 2017 - [PATCH 000/102] Convert drivers to explicit reset API

On Sun, 2017-07-23 at 20:41 +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 10:46 PM, Dmitry Torokhov
> <dmitry.torokhov at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 5:55 AM, Philipp Zabel <p.zabel at
pengutronix.de> wrote:
> 
> >>> What about reset_control_get(struct device *, const char *,
int flags)
> >>> to replace all those variants ?
> >>
> >> While I like how this looks, unfortunately
(devm_)reset_control_get
> >> already exists without the flags, so we can't change to that
with a
> >> gentle transition.
> >
> > This was done for gpiod_get() and its flags argument with horrifying
> > #define-ry, which thankfully was completely hidden from users.
> 
> For your reference:
> 
> commit bae48da237fcedd7ad09569025483b988635efb7
> "gpiolib: add gpiod_get() and gpiod_put() functions"
> 
> commit 39b2bbe3d715cf5013b5c48695ccdd25bd3bf120
> "gpio: add flags argument to gpiod_get*() functions"
> 
> commit 0dbc8b7afef6e4fddcfebcbacbeb269a0a3b06d5
> "gpio: move varargs hack outside #ifdef GPIOLIB"
> 
> commit b17d1bf16cc72a374a48d748940f700009d40ff4
> "gpio: make flags mandatory for gpiod_get functions"
> 
> Retrospectively ... was that really a good idea... it was a LOT
> of trouble to add a flag, maybe it had been better to try and
> just slam all users in a single go.
> 
> But it worked.
Thanks for the hint and the references. It seems this turned out okay,
but I wouldn't dare to introduce such macro horror^Wmagic.
I'd rather have all users converted to the _exclusive/_shared function
calls and maybe then replace the internal __reset_control_get with
Thomas' suggestion.

regards
Philipp

> Thanks for the hint and the references. It seems this turned out okay,
> but I wouldn't dare to introduce such macro horror^Wmagic.
> I'd rather have all users converted to the _exclusive/_shared function
> calls and maybe then replace the internal __reset_control_get with
> Thomas' suggestion.
I didn't follow the discussion closely. Shall I still apply the i2c
patches?

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/nouveau/attachments/20170812/bb2b40d1/attachment.sig>

On Sat, 2017-08-12 at 13:43 +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > Thanks for the hint and the references. It seems this turned out
> > okay,
> > but I wouldn't dare to introduce such macro horror^Wmagic.
> > I'd rather have all users converted to the _exclusive/_shared
> > function
> > calls and maybe then replace the internal __reset_control_get with
> > Thomas' suggestion.
> 
> I didn't follow the discussion closely. Shall I still apply the i2c
> patches?
Yes, please.

regards
Philipp