Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20191224120709.18247-1-brgl@bgdev.pl> <20191224120709.18247-3-brgl@bgdev.pl>
 <20200201195232.GA17364@roeck-us.net>
In-Reply-To: <20200201195232.GA17364@roeck-us.net>
From:   Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>
Date:   Mon, 3 Feb 2020 12:04:57 +0100
Message-ID: <CAMpxmJU=wvONwure-MS9vb=0fuRgnf+wVshBQn2N=uwcZUG3Bw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 02/13] gpiolib: have a single place of calling set_config()
To:     Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Cc:     Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>,
        Kent Gibson <warthog618@gmail.com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        linux-gpio <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

sob., 1 lut 2020 o 20:52 Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> napisa=C5=82(a)=
:
>
> On Tue, Dec 24, 2019 at 01:06:58PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>
> >
> > Instead of calling the gpiochip's set_config() callback directly and
> > checking its existence every time - just add a new routine that perform=
s
> > this check internally. Call it in gpio_set_config() and
> > gpiod_set_transitory(). Also call it in gpiod_set_debounce() and drop
> > the check for chip->set() as it's irrelevant to this config option.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
>
> This patch made it into mainline, even though a regression was reported
> against it by Geert. Please note that it is not just a theoretic problem
> but _does_ indeed cause regressions.
>
> Guenter
>

Hi Guenter,

I'm sorry for this, I was still largely unavailable for the past two
weeks. I'll address it today, this time for real.

Best regards,
Bartosz Golaszewski