Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200904154547.3836-1-brgl@bgdev.pl> <20200904154547.3836-24-brgl@bgdev.pl>
 <26ea1683-da8f-30e7-f004-3616e96d56b3@infradead.org> <20200907095932.GU1891694@smile.fi.intel.com>
 <CAMpxmJXvhYOVkZY7LLf=v+o8E2xKTh1RYhLrdVsS9nN1XZ5QJQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200907115310.GA1891694@smile.fi.intel.com> <CAMpxmJUfNkko4Rrb4N5CF_rdwRAWGhVr9DSOHfhYyTxYSH7dsQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200907122238.GA1849893@kroah.com> <CAMpxmJXM=8oGoPSGg8G8XJ4HXJFrAQ2-_EXrz3rf3+ZmCSWB7g@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200907140829.GL1891694@smile.fi.intel.com> <CAMuHMdV42oUu=af_O=aUVED_Nxce0wnTKTMNNSskaSGT=p5ZMw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMuHMdV42oUu=af_O=aUVED_Nxce0wnTKTMNNSskaSGT=p5ZMw@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>
Date:   Mon, 7 Sep 2020 18:08:14 +0200
Message-ID: <CAMRc=MeBL7opS6wBO1nEesHJg8Yv_GR0xxRae3mtQ2xj=eBOGg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 23/23] Documentation: gpio: add documentation for gpio-mockup
To:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Cc:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
        Kent Gibson <warthog618@gmail.com>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>,
        linux-gpio <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-doc <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Sep 7, 2020 at 5:23 PM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Andy,
>
> On Mon, Sep 7, 2020 at 4:14 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 07, 2020 at 03:49:23PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 7, 2020 at 2:22 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman
> > > <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Sep 07, 2020 at 02:06:15PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > > Yes it is.  Or at least until you fix all existing users so that if you
> > > > do change it, no one notices it happening :)
> > > >
> > >
> > > Then another question is: do we really want to commit to a stable ABI
> > > for a module we only use for testing purposes and which doesn't
> > > interact with any real hardware.
> > >
> > > Rewriting this module without any legacy cruft is tempting though. :)
> >
> > Another thought spoken loudly: maybe it can be unified with GPIO aggregator
> > code? In that case it makes sense.
>
> You want to aggregate GPIOs out of thin air?
>
> From DT, that would be something like
>
>     gpios = <&gpio1 2>, <0>, <0>, <&gpio2, 5>;
>
> ?
>
> For writing into ".../new_device", we could agree on something like "0"
> means not backed by an existing GPIO?
>

I'm really not sure this makes any sense. Why complicate an otherwise
elegant module that is gpio-aggregator with functionalities that
obviously don't belong here? I want to add various parameters that
would affect the way the simulated chips work - this really doesn't
need to go into the aggregator.

Bart